FC: CA to NCAA, "It's on." (link)

[Nittany Ziggy]

That's 90% of players at big time football schools.

Question: What percentage of draft eligible FBS players playing this season are going to make an NFL roster in 2020?
This is the conundrum. An overwhelming majority of FBS players (90%+) are never going to be drafted or play professional football. I think that way more than 10% of the players are there for the free education and the thrill of extending their time playing the game they love.
For anyone that thinks we have a college debt problem, how do you reconcile the number of players in FBS that aren’t going to play just 1 play in the NFL against the outrageous cost of a college education and now making them “semi-professional”?
I’m not arguing Midnighter, just trying to put out a different perspective.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

Another perspective:

Of those kids playing big $$$$ FB (and, even more so, BB) how many get an “education” that would be worth anything even approximating what they are told they are given? In other words..... how many folks - athletes or not - would even consider paying, out of their pocket, the amount that the school says their scholarships are worth - in exchange for the legitimate educational opportunity they are given as “student-athletes”?

(Answer: Probably about 0....... unless they are really bad at “cost-benefit”)

Agree on BB. Football? Not so much.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Question: What percentage of draft eligible FBS players playing this season are going to make an NFL roster in 2020?
This is the conundrum. An overwhelming majority of FBS players (90%+) are never going to be drafted or play professional football. I think that way more than 10% of the players are there for the free education and the thrill of extending their time playing the game they love.
For anyone that thinks we have a college debt problem, how do you reconcile the number of players in FBS that aren’t going to play just 1 play in the NFL against the outrageous cost of a college education and now making them “semi-professional”?
I’m not arguing Midnighter, just trying to put out a different perspective.

That's a good point - but mine was that 90% of the kids at 'big time' college football programs (the ones who might actually make some money off of their likeness) believe they're going to play pro football - not that they will.

Forcing a kid to get a degree or to 'study' when his passion and goal in life is to be a pro football player is like making a mathematician study and perform ballet in addition to studying and excelling at math.

I for one don't mind either way - but the folks here who believe their lives are ruined because of this are just nutso.

 

[AWS1022]

They are paid via scholarship, room/board and "cost of attendance" stipend. How is that not paid? You can argue that they are not paid what they are worth, which is fine. They can go do something else with their late teens/early 20s.

I’m not sure why so many people think playing high level college sports is such a bad gig. It’s not like they’re living in squalor and working in a coal mine. They have it pretty good...much better than minor league baseball players. Hell, college baseball players have it much better than minor league baseball players.

 

[AWS1022]

I’ve yet to hear anyone say it was a “bad gig”...... certainly not on this board (though I know there are some posts I have blocked)

In any event, it certainly isn’t some prevailing thought.

Sounds like some bookoo false-premising going on

Then why are so many posters so eager to change things and get them more than what they’re already getting? So many posts talking about the poor neglected players getting nothing while the greedy old coaches and NCAA make all the money.

 

[Waste Management Consultant]

I’m not sure why so many people think playing high level college sports is such a bad gig. It’s not like they’re living in squalor and working in a coal mine. They have it pretty good...much better than minor league baseball players. Hell, college baseball players have it much better than minor league baseball players.

Nothing wrong with the coal mine.

 

[AWS1022]

Nothing wrong with the coal mine.

Except for those that have to work in one.

 

[AWS1022]

When thousands upon thousands of (mostly) barely competent (at best) dumb-****s rake in ginormous chunks of $$$$$ from the business....... all while setting up “rules” that forbid the folks actually creating the product from profiting...... some folks think that should be changed.
You could safely assume I am one of those folks

But that’s not the way you feel...... and, I’m quite sure, you’re never going to move off of your mark, so why worry about it?

If there were a way to get more to the players without ruining the game, I would be all for it. I just don’t see how it can be done without opening the flood gates on corruption. And the people who would have to find a viable way to accomplish it are those barely competent dumb-****s you mention.

 

[step.eng69]

Those CA teams are going to be really good because the best players can go there and cash in But will other teams be permitted to play against them?

Aye, Woody, there in lays the rub.

 

[AWS1022]

Good Luck

(It ain’t that hard )

I think it’s a lot harder than you think.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

I’ve yet to hear anyone say it was a “bad gig”...... certainly not on this board (though I know there are some posts I have blocked)

In any event, it certainly isn’t some prevailing thought.

Sounds like some bookoo false-premising going on

I’ve heard people call NCAA athletes indentured servants.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

That's a good point - but mine was that 90% of the kids at 'big time' college football programs (the ones who might actually make some money off of their likeness) believe they're going to play pro football - not that they wil

Agree with your point. I think we could make some serious progress if we could address the problem with those that are good enough to play “big time” college football but not good enough to play in the NFL. These egomaniacs need to understand the simple mathematical statistics.
This was the premise of my op above. I hate it when people say that NCAA football is just a minor league when less than 5% of the players even get to an NFL training camp.

 

[Nittany Ziggy]

Congratulations.

And?

Being an indentured servant would be a “bad gig” in my opinion. How about you?

 

[AWS1022]

No...... it’s not

One could - without hardly trying - come up with enough “better ways” vav the current system, that you’d have to stack the improvements and “better ways” up like cordwood.

I could grab a bunch of them and beat you over the head with them........ but that would only annoy you, and waste my time (‘cause, of course, nothing is going to change the way you feel about the issue), so we don’t want to do that..... right?

Go ahead and submit your brilliant plan to the NCAA and we’ll get this thing finished over night.

 

[Waste Management Consultant]

Except for those that have to work in one.

Years in the coal mine
My grandfather 36 years
Father. 34 years. PSU grad
Uncle 36 years
Brother 13 years

Nothing wrong with them except hard working good people.

 

[AWS1022]

My grandfather 36 years
Father. 34 years
Uncle 36 years
Brother 13 years

Nothing wrong with them except hard working good people.

Good for your father, uncle and brother, but that doesn’t make it good work. It’s a horrible job that’s bad for your health. I know a ton of people who used to work in the mines and don’t anymore because...well, because it’s working in the mines.

 

[Pennstate52]

One law to squash it all

TITLE IX will put a big kink in things

 

[NittPicker]

One law to squash it all

TITLE IX will put a big kink in things

As has been kicked around here before, Title IX deals with educational opportunities. If athletes are classified as employees of a university, would that be enough to skirt Title IX requirements?? I'm not saying it will or it won't but no doubt there will be a plan to get around it.

 

[Waste Management Consultant]

Good for your father, uncle and brother, but that doesn’t make it good work. It’s a horrible job that’s bad for your health. I know a ton of people who used to work in the mines and don’t anymore because...well, because it’s working in the mines.

Wow, this statement says a lot about you. Enjoy your evening, Sir.

 

[LMTLION]

I think it is time to pull our heads out of the sand and realize college football is a huge revenue generator now compared to only 20 - 30 years ago. It is comparable to professional sports in revenue and some schools are pulling in north of 100 mill of revenue . It’s time to share the wealth with the kids. To say that a paid college education is proper compensation made sense 40 years ago but not now. I am so sick of the self righteous and holier than thou arguments about the sanctity of college sports - it’s all a bunch of horse crap. College football is at its core a huge revenue generating business with our own school being one of the largest of those businesses. We want our youth to become self-reliant and connect reward to hard work, but force them to work for, yes, for, a ncaa system that in fact takes advantage of them in the worst way.

 

[PS4814]

One law to squash it all

TITLE IX will put a big kink in things

I see this brought up as a talking point but don’t understand why this law would impact title ix in any way. All athletes would have the same opportunity to make monies from 3rd parties.

I’m honestly curious how title ix would enter the debate if you’re willing to expand on that thought.

 

[AWS1022]

Wow, this statement says a lot about you. Enjoy your evening, Sir.

It says that I think going down in a hole in unsafe working conditions that have led to a lot of deaths both immediately and over the course of time is a crappy way for someone to make a living. I respect those that do it, but would wish better for them. I also think digging ditches, roofing, laying pavement, cleaning out port a Johns, and slaughtering cows are all crappy jobs too...doesn’t mean I have anything against people that do these jobs or think any less of them, I just wouldn’t choose that sort of occupation.

 

[LafayetteBear]

I see this brought up as a talking point but don’t understand why this law would impact title ix in any way. All athletes would have the same opportunity to make monies from 3rd parties.

I’m honestly curious how title ix would enter the debate if you’re willing to expand on that thought.

A few thoughts:

1. California's law (AB206) just passed and will not be effective until 2023, so it is really impossible to know at this early date how it will affect things.

2. This situation really calls for federal legislation or, in the absence of that, the NCAA's member schools agreeing on some kind of system that might allow individual athletes to get some quantum of endorsement money.

3. My biggest concern is that schools might end up paying significant money that is nominally "endorsement money" but in fact recruitment money. Like the example in an early post in this thread, that of Jeff Bezos offering a recruit a $2.5 million endorsement contract upon the condition that he commits to the University of New Mexico. I have not read AB206, but if it contains provisions that somehow address this problem (precluding endorsement deals from being concluded until some period of time after the player commits to his university?), then that would be helpful. In that case, perhaps endorsement deals would truly reflect the player's marketability, and likely be pretty few in number.

4. True endorsement deals involve a third party paying money directly to the player or his representatives. They would not take money directly out of university coffers. Individual endorsement deals would, however, reduce the value of team or university endorsement deals. For example, Nike is likely to be far less willing to pay the University of Oregon (much less any other school) big bucks for wearing unis that include the Nike logo if individual players can conclude their own deals and wear the logos of competing sponsors.

 

[L.A.Lion]

A few thoughts:


I have not read AB206,

Here, let me help you with that (it's SB 206, BTW):

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB206

It's a pretty short statute.

but if it contains provisions that somehow address this problem (precluding endorsement deals from being concluded until some period of time after the player commits to his university?), then that would be helpful. In that case, perhaps endorsement deals would truly reflect the player's marketability, and likely be pretty few in number.

It doesn't.

4. True endorsement deals involve a third party paying money directly to the player or his representatives. They would not take money directly out of university coffers. Individual endorsement deals would, however, reduce the value of team or university endorsement deals. For example, Nike is likely to be far less willing to pay the University of Oregon (much less any other school) big bucks for wearing unis that include the Nike logo if individual players can conclude their own deals and wear the logos of competing sponsors.

This issue is addressed. A student athlete cannot ink an endorsement deal with Under Armor if the school has a contract with Nike and terms of the contracts "conflict". See Sec. 2(e).

 

[Delco Lion]

PA lawmakers bring forth a similar proposal.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fair-p...ensation-college-student-athletes-2019-10-01/

 

[PS4814]

A few thoughts:

1. California's law (AB206) just passed and will not be effective until 2023, so it is really impossible to know at this early date how it will affect things.

2. This situation really calls for federal legislation or, in the absence of that, the NCAA's member schools agreeing on some kind of system that might allow individual athletes to get some quantum of endorsement money.

3. My biggest concern is that schools might end up paying significant money that is nominally "endorsement money" but in fact recruitment money. Like the example in an early post in this thread, that of Jeff Bezos offering a recruit a $2.5 million endorsement contract upon the condition that he commits to the University of New Mexico. I have not read AB206, but if it contains provisions that somehow address this problem (precluding endorsement deals from being concluded until some period of time after the player commits to his university?), then that would be helpful. In that case, perhaps endorsement deals would truly reflect the player's marketability, and likely be pretty few in number.

4. True endorsement deals involve a third party paying money directly to the player or his representatives. They would not take money directly out of university coffers. Individual endorsement deals would, however, reduce the value of team or university endorsement deals. For example, Nike is likely to be far less willing to pay the University of Oregon (much less any other school) big bucks for wearing unis that include the Nike logo if individual players can conclude their own deals and wear the logos of competing sponsors.

I appreciate the addition to the conversation - I'd recommend reading the article Barry shared as it addresses several of your points.

The Title IX angle is something though that I'd really like to hear an explanation about from whoever believes that it'll put a stop to this law. Until then I'm leaning towards the point that it is a red herring.

 

[AWS1022]

Well....... it’s a good thing for you that someone else does it then. Right?

No doubt. I would do it if I had to, but thankfully I don’t.

 

[Woodpecker]

Recruiting can just come down to the program with the largest and deepest group of sponsors willing to write the endorsement checks.

And everyone wants THAT to be the determining factor for winning

 

[BobPSU92]

If this holds up, Alabama will be first in line to pass a similar law. Without Bama football, that state has ZERO to cling to.

I'll say the obvious: bama players would suffer a pay-cut resulting for such legislation.

 

[BobPSU92]

Someone discovered 'memes'....and yes it will. Pay attention.

Money is involved, so it's unavoidable. The topic won't suddenly go away. It keeps gaining steam, and like it or not, it will become the norm. It's just a matter of when and in which forms.

 

[SR108]

If you mean paid via a 'scholarship', then I disagree. If you mean 'free cars and cash' via bagmen, I agree (at many schools). Read norm's article - would be pretty funny to see a school like Rutgers land top recruits because they will be able to sign endorsement agreements with agents in NYC. Will flip college football on its head.

Yea, this may not be good for PSU. State College is not exactly the hub of National advertising.

 

[PS4814]

Yea, this may not be good for PSU. State College is not exactly the hub of National advertising.

No, but PSU is a national/international brand that many corporations would be likely to want to work with simply due to the visibility it brings with it.

 

[PSU2UNC]

I have heard this being referred to as the "Olympic model", e.g. Olympic athletes are (mostly) amateurs but can get endorsement deals (e.g. Wheaties box).

Here's the issue with that. In the Olympic model for Olympic athletes, all athletes ultimately play for the same team (in our case USA Olympic team).

So what, you might ask?

Relating the Olympic model to the possible CFB scenario would be as if Simone Biles could go compete for China if they offered here the best endorsement deal.

Can you see how that is going to be a problem?

I'm not saying that this can't work in CFB. I'm just saying that it cannot just be a free for all in terms of endorsements.

 

[LafayetteBear]

My biggest concern is that schools might end up paying significant money that is nominally "endorsement money" but in fact recruitment money. Like the example in an early post in this thread, that of Jeff Bezos offering a recruit a $2.5 million endorsement contract upon the condition that he commits to the University of New Mexico. I have not read SB206, but if it contains provisions that somehow address this problem (precluding endorsement deals from being concluded until some period of time after the player commits to his university?), then that would be helpful. In that case, perhaps endorsement deals would truly reflect the player's marketability, and likely be pretty few in number.

It doesn't.

I think the possibility of recruiting payments posing as endorsement payments presents the biggest problem in this area, but I'm not surprised to learn that SB206 fails to address it. The potential for abuse, and an arms race in de facto recruiting payments, is certainly there. Who knows how that will shake out, though.

 

[PearlSUJam]

 

[interrobang]

Delany's response was odd. He basically said that he'd rather see guys go pro early and cash in on their NIL there than cash in in college.

 

[Nitt1300]

The NCAA and the schools brought this on themselves. They have been making millions off these kids, and in the case of MBB at least, not even putting up any pretense that it's about education.

 

[BobPSU92]

View embedded media

delany got a $20 MM bonus last year, but he doesn’t want the slaves student-athletes who make that bonus possible to make any money. Asshole.

 

[PearlSUJam]

 

[PS4814]

View embedded media

Mr. Paterno, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.