ADVERTISEMENT

CA bill to pay amateur athletes

On paper it's a fine idea. But in implementation, it'll end up nothing but legalizing the recruiting bag man (even if those who actually have a marketable likeness are cashing in, too)
 
Completely stupid idea!!! No one values nor appreciates a free all expenses paid college education!!! This is absolutely ridiculous!!!
 
Last edited:
Completely stupid idea!!! No one values nor appreciates a free all expenses paid college education!!! This absolutely ridiculous!!!
I think they value it, but at the same time realize that the price of poker has risen to the point where it exceeds the actual monetary value of tuition/books/room & board. Maybe if the ncaa weren’t making BILLIONS on their names/likenesses, what they’re currently getting would be enough.
 
"Harbaugh in May told the San Francisco Examiner that Michigan admitted athletes who were borderline academically, then steered them into less-challenging courses to keep them eligible." "When they get out, the people who adulated them won't hire them."


And this:



"The new deal removed the retention bonus but raised Barbour’s base salary to $1.169 million, which is retroactive to July 2018. Her salary increases $50,000 per year until 2022-23 when she will receive $1.369 million.

Barbour also is eligible for a yearly maximum of $100,000 in bonuses based on student-athlete graduation rates and team successes."

And another raise this month.


th

Wait, don't you know that Barbour contributes more to the success of teams than any athlete who takes the field? You don't? I'll send you the details once I'm ensconced in the Royal Palace in Stockholm.:)
 
At least football and men's basketball players bring in money. Do any of the other sports come close to bringing in what they cost? How can they justify paying those people?
 
I doubt many colleges in California can afford to pay their athletes, especially if the big time programs are giving up NCAA TV and conference money.

From the NCAA's football perspective, only 1 California team is in this week's Top 25 -- that would be USC at #24.

My understanding of the law is that it allows the athletes to profit from the use of their likeness, not for the schools to pay them. So, have a QB pose with your beer in his hand and pay him several thousands bucks. This will lure all kinds of talent to California.
 
My understanding of the law is that it allows the athletes to profit from the use of their likeness, not for the schools to pay them. So, have a QB pose with your beer in his hand and pay him several thousands bucks. This will lure all kinds of talent to California.

And that will kill the players NCAA eligibility.

In many instances, the NCAA holds athletes to a higher standard than what is legal in an individual state.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dailybuck777
And that will kill the players NCAA eligibility, and the school will be forfeiting their NCAA and TV money.

In many instances, the NCAA holds athletes to a higher standard than what is legal in an individual state.

NCAA "money" is relatively insignificant. TV money comes from conferences. The PAC 12 without California schools? Let's just say that it's TV contract will be severely diminished, so some accommodation will have to be reached.

As for the NCAA and "higher standards?" LMAO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stormingnorm
How long will it be before someone in CA hires an ambulance chaser to file a Title 9 lawsuit demanding equal pay for women college athletes? Like all foolish governmental incursion this will have massive, unintended consequences.
 
  • Like
Reactions: harjeff
In the end it will kill many scholarships for the Olympic type female/male sports that don't make money. Many athletic depts. operate in the red anyway and this will hurt the bottom line, which will in turn cause them to make cuts and where will they cut first...programs that lose money, which are about everything outside of football and men's basketball. Furthermore, this will make the illegal payments to recruits legal as the boosters will just say we are paying them for doing this commercial or using their name in our ads.
 
In the end it will kill many scholarships for the Olympic type female/male sports that don't make money. Many athletic depts. operate in the red anyway and this will hurt the bottom line, which will in turn cause them to make cuts and where will they cut first...programs that lose money, which are about everything outside of football and men's basketball. Furthermore, this will make the illegal payments to recruits legal as the boosters will just say we are paying them for doing this commercial or using their name in our ads.

As Roar More said this bill would allow students to profit from their name, image and likeness. No money is coming from the athletic departments or colleges and no scholarship dollars are being impacted. If the law passes and say EA Sports wanted to bring back the NCAA football series and populated the game with current players then those players could receive compensation from EA for the use of their names and likenesses. Would bigger schools and better athletes earn more compensation - of course! But that's the free market in action that everyone ballyhoos about.

Would it make the "bag man" legal - you bet! But it's already occurring anyway so why not put it on the books as a sponsorship and have taxes paid when a player goes to a local car dealership, makes a commercial, and walks away with a wad of cash.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sullivan
Hard to believe the moral and legalistic posturing involved with "amateur" athletes. These are almost all people who are legally subject to being conscripted to go out and to kill and be killed for our values. Let them make a few bucks. The people who now deliver the goods (the bagmen) will soon become our new cultural icons.
 
Completely stupid idea!!! No one values nor appreciates a free all expenses paid college education!!! This is absolutely ridiculous!!!

Or perhaps they are beginning to understand the value of their services.
 
I don't understand why those most vehemently opposed to athletes earning money for their likeness have no problems with hucksters like Dabo Swinney earning $9.3 million a year off cheap/close to free labor.
 
I don't understand why those most vehemently opposed to athletes earning money for their likeness have no problems with hucksters like Dabo Swinney earning $9.3 million a year off cheap/close to free labor.
Anyone see the memo from the NCAA that such a move would create an unfair competitive edge and thus CA schools would be prohibited from NCAA events. Not quoting exactly but noted in this mornings newspaper.
 
So what happens once the California governor signs it into law? Does the ncaa immediately disqualify all California teams from competing in the ncaa? The fall out to the PAC 12 would be huge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: psu1969a
So what happens once the California governor signs it into law? Does the ncaa immediately disqualify all California teams from competing in the ncaa? The fall out to the PAC 12 would be huge.

The law doesn't take effect until 2023. And by then the NCAA will have enacted some NIL rules anyway, so this law will be moot.
 
I didn’t realize it didn’t kick in until 2023. Sounds like the Cali legislature made the delay hoping other states join them so they don’t shoot themselves in the foot by eliminating their own universities.
 
I don't understand why those most vehemently opposed to athletes earning money for their likeness have no problems with hucksters like Dabo Swinney earning $9.3 million a year off cheap/close to free labor.

Because that "huckster" coaches his players and gives them the free exposure they need to possibly make far more than $9.3 million dollars.
 
It's Cally. The only thing NOT in the fine print is a plan to clean up street poop.

Yea. You're right. The crooked politicians out there have turned California from the drop dead greatest state in the Union into a freaken dump. But I'm sure all their back pockets are stuffed full of cash.
 
Yea. You're right. The crooked politicians out there have turned California from the drop dead greatest state in the Union into a freaken dump. But I'm sure all their back pockets are stuffed full of cash.

Yep - a freaking dump with only the 5th largest economy in the world ahead of the UK and behind Germany. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sproul
Yea. You're right. The crooked politicians out there have turned California from the drop dead greatest state in the Union into a freaken dump. But I'm sure all their back pockets are stuffed full of cash.

Hm, and yet they are the forefront of technology, education and wealth in this country.
But sure, people are clamoring at the borders of Alabama and Mississippi to get in. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sproul and PS4814
Hm, and yet they are the forefront of technology, education and wealth in this country.
But sure, people are clamoring at the borders of Alabama and Mississippi to get in. :rolleyes:

Well, actually, since you brought it up, since 2011, DOMESTIC net migration wrt California has been negative. More people from California have moved out to other states than have moved in from other states, and it's accelerating faster and faster every year.

California's population is still growing, but it's due to INTERNATIONAL migration and the resulting increasing birth rate.
 
CA can say it's legal all they want, but if the schools want to stay in the NCAA it's still against those rules.
 
I don't understand why those most vehemently opposed to athletes earning money for their likeness have no problems with hucksters like Dabo Swinney earning $9.3 million a year off cheap/close to free labor.
because just like your example.. I'm inclined to think this will only benefit the high caliber athlete (the 1% of the 1%) while hurting the others who no longer will be able to play due to smaller schools pulling scholarship #'s. Swinney will be fine... Appalachian State's of the world, not so much.

I'd like to be proven wrong btw... i just have a cynical view of it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT