Crowder & Hayward to HOF

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

"The athletes get compensated enough" isn't a good argument for the likeness conversation. So because something is good enough, that doesn't mean we should try to make it better?

I think 99% of D1 student athletes are fairly to over compensated for the work they do. I also think they should be allowed to profit off their likeness. How much the athletes are compensated is irrelevant to whether or not a player should be allowed to profit of his/her likeness.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I pretty much agree with TAMU and think most people who against really use poor logic to justify why they just like things the way they are.

[Uncle Rico]

I pretty much agree with TAMU and think most people who against really use poor logic to justify why they just like things the way they are.

It’s largely an American thing.  Our fascination with amateurism and the purity of it is one of the weirdest quirks of our nation.  It goes back to early 20th Century thinking of being a professional in sports as something of ill-repute outside baseball and boxing.  And even then, baseball players couldn’t make a real living simply playing a sport. 

There is nothing remotely amateur about college basketball except the officiating.  Coaches are paid millions of dollars, TV pays exorbitant rights fees and universities are in a constant arms race to build bigger and better facilities and we’re concerned athletes getting likeness compensation might open a Pandora’s Box to what?  A few heavyweights might have an advantage?  They already have that.

I watch grown adults verbally assault college athletes, attack them online all in the name of winning and giving fans a chance to puff their chests out.  It’s laughable to me we’re offended they want to earn off their skills. 

[Jay Bee]

I pretty much agree with TAMU and think most people who against really use poor logic to justify why they just like things the way they are.

How u feel bout english? No Matta way north of Milwaukee ainer

[MU82]

It’s largely an American thing.  Our fascination with amateurism and the purity of it is one of the weirdest quirks of our nation.  It goes back to early 20th Century thinking of being a professional in sports as something of ill-repute outside baseball and boxing.  And even then, baseball players couldn’t make a real living simply playing a sport. 

There is nothing remotely amateur about college basketball except the officiating.  Coaches are paid millions of dollars, TV pays exorbitant rights fees and universities are in a constant arms race to build bigger and better facilities and we’re concerned athletes getting likeness compensation might open a Pandora’s Box to what?  A few heavyweights might have an advantage?  They already have that.

I watch grown adults verbally assault college athletes, attack them online all in the name of winning and giving fans a chance to puff their chests out.  It’s laughable to me we’re offended they want to earn off their skills.

Superb comment.

[Cheeks]

It’s largely an American thing.  Our fascination with amateurism and the purity of it is one of the weirdest quirks of our nation.  It goes back to early 20th Century thinking of being a professional in sports as something of ill-repute outside baseball and boxing.  And even then, baseball players couldn’t make a real living simply playing a sport. 

There is nothing remotely amateur about college basketball except the officiating.  Coaches are paid millions of dollars, TV pays exorbitant rights fees and universities are in a constant arms race to build bigger and better facilities and we’re concerned athletes getting likeness compensation might open a Pandora’s Box to what?  A few heavyweights might have an advantage?  They already have that.

I watch grown adults verbally assault college athletes, attack them online all in the name of winning and giving fans a chance to puff their chests out.  It’s laughable to me we’re offended they want to earn off their skills.

Again you are lumping all college basketball together.  What happens at the top 50 programs doesn’t mean the same is happening for the other 300, let alone D2 or D3.

Most coaches are not paid millions of dollars.

Most schools are not in an arms race.

The high tv rights paid are for some conferences and many do not even have a tv deal at all.

We keep trying to find a solution to a “problem” that not only doesn’t exist, but where it is perceived to exist only happens to a small number.  Broad brush strokes trying to assess the small sliver that are also going to do just fine when they get out.

You want to make a virtuous argument, your likeness can be marketed if you get a 3.0GPA and got to class.

[Uncle Rico]

Again you are lumping all college basketball together.  What happens at the top 50 programs doesn’t mean the same is happening for the other 300, let alone D2 or D3.

Most coaches are not paid millions of dollars.

Most schools are not in an arms race.

The high tv rights paid are for some conferences and many do not even have a tv deal at all.

We keep trying to find a solution to a “problem” that not only doesn’t exist, but where it is perceived to exist only happens to a small number.  Broad brush strokes trying to assess the small sliver that are also going to do just fine when they get out.

You want to make a virtuous argument, your likeness can be marketed if you get a 3.0GPA and got to class.

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

RICO to the hoop with authority!

[lawdog77]

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

I could not agree more. If your school cannot raise the money to pay the players a base salary, move down a division

[cheebs09]

Again you are lumping all college basketball together.  What happens at the top 50 programs doesn’t mean the same is happening for the other 300, let alone D2 or D3.

Most coaches are not paid millions of dollars.

Most schools are not in an arms race.

The high tv rights paid are for some conferences and many do not even have a tv deal at all.

We keep trying to find a solution to a “problem” that not only doesn’t exist, but where it is perceived to exist only happens to a small number.  Broad brush strokes trying to assess the small sliver that are also going to do just fine when they get out.

You want to make a virtuous argument, your likeness can be marketed if you get a 3.0GPA and got to class.

I’m trying to figure out what this has to do with profiting off your likeness? Is the argument the TV rights would be lower for the NCAA tourney, so it hurts smaller schools? Otherwise, why would it matter?

I think people are thinking there’s this endless supply of money from boosters that are going to pay every player a million dollars a year. Some might shell out big bucks, but after the top few players, I doubt it will be a ton. The bust rate of the top 100 is high enough that the ROI doesn’t really make sense.

If people are getting paid 100k to shoot a commercial at a car dealership in Kentucky, so be it. They’d probably get some form of that under the table now.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

Yep.

And Division 1 is too large anyway.  They could drop 1/3 of its members and it would have no real impact on the game.

[MU82]

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

And again, Unk, you have nailed it.

[Pakuni]

I’m trying to figure out what this has to do with profiting off your likeness? Is the argument the TV rights would be lower for the NCAA tourney, so it hurts smaller schools? Otherwise, why would it matter?

I suspect the fear is that if corporate sponsors are giving players endorsement deals, that will come from the came pool of money that today is going to the schools. Money for players = less money for the schools.

And Uncle Rico is right. Why are we insisting that the schools that have built successful programs subsidize their unsuccessful competitors?

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

U guys are complete losers.  Take it to the superbar

[Jay Bee]

And Uncle Rico is right. Why are we insisting that the schools that have built successful programs subsidize their unsuccessful competitors?

Ahhh, surely you’re against Title IX!

[Uncle Rico]

Ahhh, surely you’re against Title IX!

Title IX wouldn’t be an issue.  Female athletes could get compensated for their likeness as well

[Shooter McGavin]

But if the money goes to the players and not the schools in order to fund the other non revenue sports those sports will disappear.  This is a circular argument going nowhere.

[Uncle Rico]

But if the money goes to the players and not the schools in order to fund the other non revenue sports those sports will disappear.  This is a circular argument going nowhere.

Schools aren’t going to get TV money?  Why be in a conference then?  Let’s not act like there isn’t enough money being spread around in major college sports that the women’s soccer team would somehow be in jeopardy if athletes got likeness compensation.

Universities will have to ask themselves what is their purpose then if the doomsday scenarios of athletes getting compensated for their name and likeness come true like some fear. 

[Pakuni]

Ahhh, surely you’re against Title IX!

Irrelevant.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

But if the money goes to the players and not the schools in order to fund the other non revenue sports those sports will disappear.  This is a circular argument going nowhere.

What money would stop going to schools and start going to the players if the players were allowed to profit off their likeness? Honest question, I've never heard this argument before.

[Cheeks]

Then those schools you claim aren’t in an arms race shouldn’t be participating at the same level as the major conferences.  They happily take every dollar they can get from TV and the tournament. 

Amateurism is a sham meant to line the pockets of the few, not the many.

There is some truth to that, but it also means you should stop implying that all these coaches are making millions, that programs are all doing these things you don’t agree with.  They simply aren’t.

As for the money, all the membership receives some dollars.  They provide the competition and as long as that is the case, they will be entitled to some of it.  We can say lop off 100 or 150 schools, good luck with scheduling when that happens.

[Cheeks]

Yep.

And Division 1 is too large anyway.  They could drop 1/3 of its members and it would have no real impact on the game.

Patently untrue.  Aside from massive schedule disruption, it would also take away opportunities for thousands of student athletes as well.

[Cheeks]

I suspect the fear is that if corporate sponsors are giving players endorsement deals, that will come from the came pool of money that today is going to the schools. Money for players = less money for the schools.

And Uncle Rico is right. Why are we insisting that the schools that have built successful programs subsidize their unsuccessful competitors?

Why do we insist on successful people subsidizing other citizens....think of it as a tax then you can get your head around it and like it.

[Cheeks]

I’m trying to figure out what this has to do with profiting off your likeness? Is the argument the TV rights would be lower for the NCAA tourney, so it hurts smaller schools? Otherwise, why would it matter?

I think people are thinking there’s this endless supply of money from boosters that are going to pay every player a million dollars a year. Some might shell out big bucks, but after the top few players, I doubt it will be a ton. The bust rate of the top 100 is high enough that the ROI doesn’t really make sense.

If people are getting paid 100k to shoot a commercial at a car dealership in Kentucky, so be it. They’d probably get some form of that under the table now.

I’m merely pointing out the argument continues to be Johnny Studmuffin could make more money if he wasn’t being put on the NCAA plantation (those exact words have been used by some, I am not exaggerating).  Or coaches make millions.  TV money everywhere.

Broad brushes that impact not that many programs....a solution in search of a problem.

Then of course there is the typical, “well it is happening anyway” so shine some light on it and it makes it all better somehow....which isn’t the case.  How about we work harder on punishing those that do it underhanded rather than opening up the flood gates.  More importantly. It creates even further competitive imbalance.  Bigger schools have more alums, more alums means more rich alums, more businesses, etc...it is all about scale...some of you are literally saying let the rich get richer or the big get bigger.  Scale is a great thing if you have it.

[Pakuni]

Why do we insist on successful people subsidizing other citizens....think of it as a tax then you can get your head around it and like it.

1. Politics
2. Bad analogy. It would be more like insisting that McDonald's subsidize Hardee's.