collapse

* Resources


UDM 4

* 2018-2019 SOTG


2018-19 Season SoG Tally
Howard11
S Hauser4
John4
Anim3
Chartouny2

'17-18 * '16-17 *
'15-16'14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Marquette games on TV: Options for Streaming FS WI Games by We R Final Four
[Today at 08:01:26 AM]


NM by TSmith34
[Today at 07:55:18 AM]


Recruiting as of 9/15/19 by jsglow
[Today at 06:51:40 AM]


California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players by TAMU Eagle
[Today at 12:42:35 AM]


Well that was a waste by TAMU Eagle
[Today at 12:15:37 AM]


How concerning is this? by Fluffy Blue Monster
[September 18, 2019, 10:50:41 PM]


DePaul Continues to Confound by Herman Cain
[September 18, 2019, 10:19:14 PM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: A long offseason

Marquette
Marquette

Madness

Date/Time: Oct 4, 2019
TV: ???
Schedule for 2018-19
24-10

Author Topic: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players  (Read 5247 times)

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #400 on: September 17, 2019, 09:41:24 AM »
Gary Parish's poll of "100" coaches regarding paying players.  Reveals a lot about Mr. Parrish...no wonder certain people here gravitate to him.  More importantly, read some of his words and the naive, childish conclusions he comes up with.



The takeaway
I was pleasantly surprised to see the coaches vote so overwhelmingly, and enthusiastically, in favor of college athletics adopting an Olympic-style model because, if you read or listen to me at all, you know I've been banging the drum on this issue for years. Still, I didn't expect more than three-fourths of coaches polled to agree with me. I would've predicted something closer to a 50-50 split.   

So this is progress, I think.  (AH YES, PROGRESS....let's not one time in the article account for what these guys do get, but "progress")

As I've explained many times -- including in this column from February 2018 -- the most sensible approach to making college athletics more fair for student-athletes, and to eliminating recruiting scandals from college sports, is for the NCAA to adopt an Olympic-style model that allows student-athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness. And I don't mean just football and basketball players. I mean, all student-athletes -- yes, the football and basketball players, but also the volleyball players, soccer players, golfers and anybody else. If an internationally known shoe company, some local car dealership, or anything in between, believes your endorsement is worth something, you should be allowed to accept whatever it is they're offering.

"But where does it stop?" asked one coach who voted "no" because of the advantages it would create for the biggest schools with the biggest boosters and corporate backing. "How much is FedEx paying James Wiseman for a billboard then? How much is a car dealership in Auburn paying Danjel Purifoy then? I think kids deserve it. But there needs to be a cap to keep the playing field somewhat even."

Among the "no" responses, this was a common theme. Coaches believe incorporating an Olympic-style model would "legalize cheating" and create advantages for certain schools. And, long as we're being honest, I can admit they're 100 percent correct. BECAUSE THEY ARE100% CORRECT It definitely would. Nike would offer endorsement deals in exchange for elite prospects enrolling, or staying, at Kentucky or Duke, Adidas would offer endorsement deals in exchange for elite prospects enrolling, or staying, at Kansas. And, yes, FedEx would put James Wiseman on a billboard quicker than FedEx can deliver a package from Memphis to Melbourne. So Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, Memphis and schools like them would absolutely have incredible recruiting advantages over schools unlike them.


But guess what? They already do!  NO, they actually do not.  Tim Tebow example one of many.   What Parrish is saying is today there are schools that do, indeed, cheat.  But they risk being caught and punished if they do.  In his Utopian silly world, that goes away. Now, it absolutely consolidates power into only a few schools.  His Memphis example is perfect.  Let Memphis do this above board, massive power consolidation.  Does Parrish want only 10 to 15 schools to run it all?  Sure seems like it.

So if your argument against an Olympic-style model is that the schools that care the most about a certain sport, and commit the most resources to a certain sport, would bring in the best prospects annually, my question is this: Have you seen the recruiting rankings lately?

That's already how most, if not all, college sports work.  What the hell is he talking about.  He clearly isn't doing his job, or doesn't understand what he is saying.

And it's why I've long believed the NCAA adopting an Olympic-style model wouldn't change the order of things much at all. He is flat out wrong. The same schools that get the best recruits now would likely get the best recruits then. It opens up a lot of schools that don't do well but now will.  Think Wisconsin who sucked balls in everything but hockey for decades, and suddenly became a power.  There are many schools like this...big schools, lots of alumni, where now the power shift will go.   The same schools that win the championships now would likely win the championships then. And, in the process, every student-athlete in every sport would get whatever it is somebody thinks they're worth -- whether it's a lot, a little or nothing more than what they already get. And the best part is that it would also effectively eliminate cheating from recruiting because, follow me here, if it's legal for student-athletes to accept whatever somebody deems they're worth, there is no table for which deals to be done under. THIS IS THE BEST ONE HERE.  This guy actually believes it will effectively eliminate cheating in recruiting.  HOLY crap. If this is a classic naive progressive comment I don't know what is. Everything could happen above board and in the light. Sure, everything would be above board and in the light...good one Gary. So we'd never again have to wonder why a prospect signed with School A instead of School B; we'd know exactly why because it would be documented. Oh sure, Gary, I'll bet everything will be on the up and up and well documented.  My God. And it should be noted that an Olympic-style model might actually give smaller schools a better chance than they currently have at enrolling elite student-athletes because, with an Olympic-style model, if a smaller school had a booster willing to throw real money around, the deal a borderline top-100 prospect could get from that school might be better than the deal the borderline top-100 prospect could get from a traditional power. So, perhaps, he or she might just accept the best deal available regardless or tradition or league affiliation.  He brings up smaller school, and those are the schools that will be destroyed in all of this.  The big schools, big alumni will dominate....but he throws a bone there to a small school because he knows deep down the small schools are toast.

Bottom line, this needs to happen.  Why?  To satisfy the "progress" you desire above?  Never once does he mention the massive benefits kids already get.

The biggest thing working against it is that the money companies and boosters are now donating to universities would, in some cases, instead go directly to student-athletes -- which means universities would lose control of some revenue, and God knows they hate the idea of that. But the NCAA adopting an Olympic-style model is undeniably popular with most fans Oh really?  Latest polls show less than 50% support it and has been for years. Really Gary, show the polls that for YEARS this has been supported by fans....you cannot. And the results of this poll suggest college basketball coaches are, on the whole, in favor of it too. So now it's just a matter of convincing the power-brokers to also get on board. It won't be easy, obviously. But, hopefully, it's not impossible.
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

Fluffy Blue Monster

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1511
  • When I'm in Holland I eat the pannenkoeken
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #401 on: September 17, 2019, 09:46:23 AM »
Gary Parish's poll of "100" coaches regarding paying players.  Reveals a lot about Mr. Parrish...no wonder certain people here gravitate to him.  More importantly, read some of his words and the naive, childish conclusions he comes up with.



The takeaway
I was pleasantly surprised to see the coaches vote so overwhelmingly, and enthusiastically, in favor of college athletics adopting an Olympic-style model because, if you read or listen to me at all, you know I've been banging the drum on this issue for years. Still, I didn't expect more than three-fourths of coaches polled to agree with me. I would've predicted something closer to a 50-50 split.   

So this is progress, I think.  (AH YES, PROGRESS....let's not one time in the article account for what these guys do get, but "progress")

As I've explained many times -- including in this column from February 2018 -- the most sensible approach to making college athletics more fair for student-athletes, and to eliminating recruiting scandals from college sports, is for the NCAA to adopt an Olympic-style model that allows student-athletes to profit from their name, image and likeness. And I don't mean just football and basketball players. I mean, all student-athletes -- yes, the football and basketball players, but also the volleyball players, soccer players, golfers and anybody else. If an internationally known shoe company, some local car dealership, or anything in between, believes your endorsement is worth something, you should be allowed to accept whatever it is they're offering.

"But where does it stop?" asked one coach who voted "no" because of the advantages it would create for the biggest schools with the biggest boosters and corporate backing. "How much is FedEx paying James Wiseman for a billboard then? How much is a car dealership in Auburn paying Danjel Purifoy then? I think kids deserve it. But there needs to be a cap to keep the playing field somewhat even."

Among the "no" responses, this was a common theme. Coaches believe incorporating an Olympic-style model would "legalize cheating" and create advantages for certain schools. And, long as we're being honest, I can admit they're 100 percent correct. BECAUSE THEY ARE100% CORRECT It definitely would. Nike would offer endorsement deals in exchange for elite prospects enrolling, or staying, at Kentucky or Duke, Adidas would offer endorsement deals in exchange for elite prospects enrolling, or staying, at Kansas. And, yes, FedEx would put James Wiseman on a billboard quicker than FedEx can deliver a package from Memphis to Melbourne. So Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, Memphis and schools like them would absolutely have incredible recruiting advantages over schools unlike them.


But guess what? They already do!  NO, they actually do not.  Tim Tebow example one of many.   What Parrish is saying is today there are schools that do, indeed, cheat.  But they risk being caught and punished if they do.  In his Utopian silly world, that goes away. Now, it absolutely consolidates power into only a few schools.  His Memphis example is perfect.  Let Memphis do this above board, massive power consolidation.  Does Parrish want only 10 to 15 schools to run it all?  Sure seems like it.

So if your argument against an Olympic-style model is that the schools that care the most about a certain sport, and commit the most resources to a certain sport, would bring in the best prospects annually, my question is this: Have you seen the recruiting rankings lately?

That's already how most, if not all, college sports work.  What the hell is he talking about.  He clearly isn't doing his job, or doesn't understand what he is saying.

And it's why I've long believed the NCAA adopting an Olympic-style model wouldn't change the order of things much at all. He is flat out wrong. The same schools that get the best recruits now would likely get the best recruits then. It opens up a lot of schools that don't do well but now will.  Think Wisconsin who sucked balls in everything but hockey for decades, and suddenly became a power.  There are many schools like this...big schools, lots of alumni, where now the power shift will go.   The same schools that win the championships now would likely win the championships then. And, in the process, every student-athlete in every sport would get whatever it is somebody thinks they're worth -- whether it's a lot, a little or nothing more than what they already get. And the best part is that it would also effectively eliminate cheating from recruiting because, follow me here, if it's legal for student-athletes to accept whatever somebody deems they're worth, there is no table for which deals to be done under. THIS IS THE BEST ONE HERE.  This guy actually believes it will effectively eliminate cheating in recruiting.  HOLY crap. If this is a classic naive progressive comment I don't know what is. Everything could happen above board and in the light. Sure, everything would be above board and in the light...good one Gary. So we'd never again have to wonder why a prospect signed with School A instead of School B; we'd know exactly why because it would be documented. Oh sure, Gary, I'll bet everything will be on the up and up and well documented.  My God. And it should be noted that an Olympic-style model might actually give smaller schools a better chance than they currently have at enrolling elite student-athletes because, with an Olympic-style model, if a smaller school had a booster willing to throw real money around, the deal a borderline top-100 prospect could get from that school might be better than the deal the borderline top-100 prospect could get from a traditional power. So, perhaps, he or she might just accept the best deal available regardless or tradition or league affiliation.  He brings up smaller school, and those are the schools that will be destroyed in all of this.  The big schools, big alumni will dominate....but he throws a bone there to a small school because he knows deep down the small schools are toast.

Bottom line, this needs to happen.  Why?  To satisfy the "progress" you desire above?  Never once does he mention the massive benefits kids already get.

The biggest thing working against it is that the money companies and boosters are now donating to universities would, in some cases, instead go directly to student-athletes -- which means universities would lose control of some revenue, and God knows they hate the idea of that. But the NCAA adopting an Olympic-style model is undeniably popular with most fans Oh really?  Latest polls show less than 50% support it and has been for years. Really Gary, show the polls that for YEARS this has been supported by fans....you cannot. And the results of this poll suggest college basketball coaches are, on the whole, in favor of it too. So now it's just a matter of convincing the power-brokers to also get on board. It won't be easy, obviously. But, hopefully, it's not impossible.



Reveals a lot about Cheeks...no wonder certain people here gravitate to him.  More importantly, read some of his words and the naive, childish conclusions he comes up with.

WhiteTrash

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #402 on: September 17, 2019, 10:05:12 AM »
Parish is the very definition of 'Drive By Media'. He spent Zero time actually researching and understanding the facts of the issue at hand. He is and always will be intellectually lazy.

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #403 on: September 17, 2019, 10:21:42 AM »
In a 2017 poll by the Washington Post and UMass Lowell, while 52% of those polled preferred scholarships over "additional compensation" for college ahletes, 66% of Americans said college athletes SHOULD BE COMPENSATED WHEN THEIR NAMES AND IMAGES ARE USED TO GENERATE PROFIT.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/20704329/blacks-whites-split-topic-compensation-college-players

In other words, while a slight majority back in 2017 seemed to be against paying athletes (which is what was meant by "additional compensation"), a SIGNIFICANT majority believed that athletes should be able to profit off their likenesses -- which is what most of us here who have taken the athletes' side are arguing for.

The numbers were even higher among black Americans polled -- 89%.

That was the most recent "legitimate" poll I could find. I'd certainly like to see something more recent, as I believe sentiment favoring athletes has only increased in the last two years.

More recently -- just in the last month -- a survey of college students showed that 53% either favored or strongly favored paying their peers who are athletes.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/student-athletes-should-get-paid-college-students-say.html

And when asked whether athletes should be allowed to profit off their likenesses, 77% of all students said they favor or strongly favor that policy. An overwhelming 80% of all students agreed that college athletes should be paid if their image is used for purposes such as selling merchandise.

So, anyway one slices it, a significant majority of Americans believe that athletes own their likenesses and should be allowed to profit off them, and students feel the same about their sports-playing peers.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 10:23:42 AM by MU82 »
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

WhiteTrash

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 432
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #404 on: September 17, 2019, 10:33:43 AM »
Good find MU82.

VegasWarrior77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 2249
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." Albert Einstein

Uncle Rico

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 487
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #406 on: September 17, 2019, 05:25:48 PM »
As Tony Bennett Gets Good PR, What Do His Players Get?
https://deadspin.com/as-tony-bennett-gets-good-pr-what-do-his-players-get-1838195591/amp?__twitter_impression=true

ESPN tagging Tony Bennett’s corporate sponsor is a bit on the nose of NCAA hypocrisy, but I digress
Alleged Slurper

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #407 on: September 17, 2019, 10:09:13 PM »
Well, in Bennett's defense, he can't give his players anything.

I thought it was a pretty cool move by him. Sure, it's PR, but that doesn't mean it wasn't generous of him.
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

brewcity77

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 19577
  • Alan Bykowski
    • Brew City Ball
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #408 on: September 17, 2019, 10:17:31 PM »
I thought posting 5 responses in a row a day later was peak Chicos, but I can admit when I'm wrong. Posting an unrequested article from someone who would never deign to respond to him, then debating in bold red font, that's peak Chicos. That's hilarious.

79Warrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3378
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #409 on: September 18, 2019, 12:06:30 AM »
I thought posting 5 responses in a row a day later was peak Chicos, but I can admit when I'm wrong. Posting an unrequested article from someone who would never deign to respond to him, then debating in bold red font, that's peak Chicos. That's hilarious.

It was ridiculous

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #410 on: September 18, 2019, 05:54:06 AM »
I thought posting 5 responses in a row a day later was peak Chicos, but I can admit when I'm wrong. Posting an unrequested article from someone who would never deign to respond to him, then debating in bold red font, that's peak Chicos. That's hilarious.

Interestingly, the one post hoopaloop hasn't responded to was the one from yesterday morning showing that the vast majority of Americans believe college athlete-students should be able to profit off their own likenesses.

He loves to cite polls, claiming they "prove" one of his points. He's a big fan of majority rule ... unless, of course, it crushes one of his pet beliefs. Then ... crickets.
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #411 on: September 18, 2019, 09:50:18 PM »
In a 2017 poll by the Washington Post and UMass Lowell, while 52% of those polled preferred scholarships over "additional compensation" for college ahletes, 66% of Americans said college athletes SHOULD BE COMPENSATED WHEN THEIR NAMES AND IMAGES ARE USED TO GENERATE PROFIT.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/20704329/blacks-whites-split-topic-compensation-college-players

In other words, while a slight majority back in 2017 seemed to be against paying athletes (which is what was meant by "additional compensation"), a SIGNIFICANT majority believed that athletes should be able to profit off their likenesses -- which is what most of us here who have taken the athletes' side are arguing for.

The numbers were even higher among black Americans polled -- 89%.

That was the most recent "legitimate" poll I could find. I'd certainly like to see something more recent, as I believe sentiment favoring athletes has only increased in the last two years.

More recently -- just in the last month -- a survey of college students showed that 53% either favored or strongly favored paying their peers who are athletes.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/11/student-athletes-should-get-paid-college-students-say.html

And when asked whether athletes should be allowed to profit off their likenesses, 77% of all students said they favor or strongly favor that policy. An overwhelming 80% of all students agreed that college athletes should be paid if their image is used for purposes such as selling merchandise.

So, anyway one slices it, a significant majority of Americans believe that athletes own their likenesses and should be allowed to profit off them, and students feel the same about their sports-playing peers.
.

2019 poll, only 49% supported it per Hartford Courant.  A majority, 50%+1 do not.   But I am glad college students say college athletes should get paid....there is nothing more mind empowering and solid in thought than an 18-22 year old’s view point on the issues of life.   What was the Winston Churchill quote again......
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #412 on: September 18, 2019, 09:52:08 PM »
Well, in Bennett's defense, he can't give his players anything.

I thought it was a pretty cool move by him. Sure, it's PR, but that doesn't mean it wasn't generous of him.

He gives his players world class instruction, provided a scholarship at a top school that over the course of the kid’s life is worth $2 million in earnings power, gave them untold memories including NCAA and other competition, free clothes, roof over their head, travel, food.....yup, he gave them nothing.

Good one.  LOL
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #413 on: September 18, 2019, 09:53:38 PM »
I thought posting 5 responses in a row a day later was peak Chicos, but I can admit when I'm wrong. Posting an unrequested article from someone who would never deign to respond to him, then debating in bold red font, that's peak Chicos. That's hilarious.

And you loved it enough to comment as did others.  No wonder you find Gary Parrish so great.  LOL.  The guy is an absolute joke, and please stop distorting your 100 D1 coaches poll....they are not 100 head coaches.
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #414 on: September 18, 2019, 10:06:24 PM »
Interestingly, the one post hoopaloop hasn't responded to was the one from yesterday morning showing that the vast majority of Americans believe college athlete-students should be able to profit off their own likenesses.

He loves to cite polls, claiming they "prove" one of his points. He's a big fan of majority rule ... unless, of course, it crushes one of his pet beliefs. Then ... crickets.

I responded, your 2017 poll said one thing, the 2019 poll said something different.

Glad polls rule the day....right, Mike?  https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/new-poll-finds-9-in-10-native-americans-arent-offended-by-redskins-name/2016/05/18/3ea11cfa-161a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

TAMU Eagle

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 15908
  • A Reading from Wojo's 1st Slide to the Marquettens
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #415 on: September 18, 2019, 10:37:45 PM »
Honest question.

The only logical reason I've heard against players being allowed to profit off their likeness is the fear that it will allow big money donors to give money to players to go their alma maters in exchange for bogus endorsement deals, further disrupting the already broken competitive balance. Which makes sense if its not properly regulated.

My question is, if this is going to happen with players being allowed to profit off their likeness, why isn't already happening with players being allowed to have jobs? Couldn't a big money donor promise a recruit a cushy internship where they make six figures for sitting by the pool all day? That would actually seem easier to pull off because I feel like hiring an intern is a lot less exposure than putting a player's face on your brand.

This isn't mean to be a "gotcha" post or anything. I honestly want to know why some are confident that the NCAA can regulate athletes getting jobs but aren't confident they could do the same with likenesses.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

~Prayer of the Scooper

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #416 on: September 18, 2019, 10:49:16 PM »
Honest question.

The only logical reason I've heard against players being allowed to profit off their likeness is the fear that it will allow big money donors to give money to players to go their alma maters in exchange for bogus endorsement deals, further disrupting the already broken competitive balance. Which makes sense if its not properly regulated.

My question is, if this is going to happen with players being allowed to profit off their likeness, why isn't already happening with players being allowed to have jobs? Couldn't a big money donor promise a recruit a cushy internship where they make six figures for sitting by the pool all day? That would actually seem easier to pull off because I feel like hiring an intern is a lot less exposure than putting a player's face on your brand.

This isn't mean to be a "gotcha" post or anything. I honestly want to know why some are confident that the NCAA can regulate athletes getting jobs but aren't confident they could do the same with likenesses.

Several reasons.  For the jobs thing to work to pull off a scam you need a lot of people in on it.  You hire the USC football player to do nothing much and get paid, the UCLA alum in the office is saying WTF.  Lots of whistleblowers potentially around.  The NCAA has to regulate it, but not as difficult.  Pay stubs, market rates, etc. 

Advertising on one’s likeness, is open ended without a limit.  That internship a kid does has guardrails of what the market will bear, but endorsements is a whole new ballgame. I can decide to pay 5 star recruit whatever the hell I want....or in a big city with 1000’s of opportunities, I get 50 alum businesses to do it.  Scale.  Scale.  Scale.  In my line of work I have paid super star athletes as little as $300K to do an endorsement and others millions of dollars for the same service.  There is no set limit.  The possibility for abuse in this area is mind boggling how easy and counterproductive to the mission of college athletics.

I disagree with your comment there is only one logical argument...there are many and have been articulated here.  Even in the “100” poll of “coaches” that has been brought up here, Title IX is brought up by some as a landline, as it should be.  Tebow’s argument I find compelling as well as others.  And just wait until you get into disharmony, holdouts, and other wonderful pleasantries this is going to cause.  No longer are these kids representing the university, they are representing Bob’s Toyota and Chick Fil A first.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 10:59:19 PM by Cheeks »
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #417 on: September 18, 2019, 10:56:05 PM »
.

2019 poll, only 49% supported it per Hartford Courant.  A majority, 50%+1 do not.   But I am glad college students say college athletes should get paid....there is nothing more mind empowering and solid in thought than an 18-22 year old’s view point on the issues of life.   What was the Winston Churchill quote again......

If it exists, please provide a link for the 2019 Courant poll. I couldn't find it. The only article I could find using a google search that included the words Hartford Courant poll college athletes referred back to the Post poll for which I provided a link.

https://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-sp-chris-murphy-college-athletes-paid-zion-williamson-20190328-20190328-eqa6o5eaa5g5bnkpf33qy43mse-story.html

A 2017 Washington Post poll found that only 38 percent of American believe players should be paid based on the revenue they generate but that 66 percent say they should earn money for the use of their names and likenesses.

So I'm definitely interested in seeing this Courant poll of yours.

Also FYI, the Post poll found that 89% of African-Americans are in favor of college athletes being allowed to profit off their likenesses. Then again, you probably believe that there is nothing more mind empowering and solid in thought than a black person's view point on the issues of life.   
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #418 on: September 18, 2019, 11:01:26 PM »
If it exists, please provide a link for the 2019 Courant poll. I couldn't find it. The only article I could find using a google search that included the words Hartford Courant poll college athletes referred back to the Post poll for which I provided a link.

https://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-sp-chris-murphy-college-athletes-paid-zion-williamson-20190328-20190328-eqa6o5eaa5g5bnkpf33qy43mse-story.html

A 2017 Washington Post poll found that only 38 percent of American believe players should be paid based on the revenue they generate but that 66 percent say they should earn money for the use of their names and likenesses.

So I'm definitely interested in seeing this Courant poll of yours.

Also FYI, the Post poll found that 89% of African-Americans are in favor of college athletes being allowed to profit off their likenesses. Then again, you probably believe that there is nothing more mind empowering and solid in thought than a black person's view point on the issues of life.

If it exists?  Are you suggesting something here Mike?  A little surprised the journalist only presented one side and didn’t find another poll.....well you are out of practice I guess.


https://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-sp-should-college-athletes-be-paid-20190523-20190523-bwh4dnktdne5hnbfvx4p5zj3cy-story.html


Ahh, playing the race card again....what Mike always comes back to.


More importantly those polls are push polls.  What is not presented is the consequences if the action is taken.  If the poll question was, should college athletes get paid, but if they are it will lead to more cheating, a consolidation of top players at big schools only, a reduction in non revenue sports.....what do you think happens?

It’s like asking people if they think it is a good idea to build a choo choo train if it costs x dollars, but when the x becomes 5x, the results change.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2019, 11:06:06 PM by Cheeks »
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

Fluffy Blue Monster

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1511
  • When I'm in Holland I eat the pannenkoeken
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #419 on: September 18, 2019, 11:07:11 PM »
Cheeks you failed to read the article you linked again. What you are claiming the poll said, is not actually what the poll said.

It was not specific on the issue of paid for likeness, and in fact mentions the same WSJ poll that MU82 mentions in the very next sentence.

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #420 on: September 18, 2019, 11:12:18 PM »
Cheeks you failed to read the article you linked again. What you are claiming the poll said, is not actually what the poll said.

It was not specific on the issue of paid for likeness, and in fact mentions the same WSJ poll that MU82 mentions in the very next sentence.

Yes, it does mention the 2017 poll....it also says support is not universal and mentions the Seton Hall poll. 

In your world maybe receiving cash because you play a sport for a university is not getting paid, in mine it is.  Whether paid for likeness or games, the student athlete is being financially compensated because they are an athlete.  Because of who they are and the platform for which they represent.  That’s why the Courant included both.
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #421 on: September 18, 2019, 11:35:25 PM »
If it exists?  Are you suggesting something here Mike?  A little surprised the journalist only presented one side and didn’t find another poll.....well you are out of practice I guess.


https://www.courant.com/sports/college/hc-sp-should-college-athletes-be-paid-20190523-20190523-bwh4dnktdne5hnbfvx4p5zj3cy-story.html


Ahh, playing the race card again....what Mike always comes back to.

Well, you're wrong again: That linked article merely refers back to the WaPo poll.

I have not been talking about athletes getting paid, as the Seton Hall poll does. I - and numerous other Scoopers - have been talking about athletes being allowed to profit off their likenesses.

So ... again ... 66 percent of Americans say college athletes should be allowed to earn money for the use of their names and likenesses.

I specifically mentioned that - bolded it and blued it - and yet you squirmily tried to pull a fast one by referring back to a subject we weren't even discussing. That's Hoopaloopin' 101 right there.

As it turns out, not only didn't your link refute what I said, your link confirmed it ... so thanks!

Finally, I'm not sure why a fact is "playing the race card." The vast majority of college football and basketball players are black, and 89% of black respondents to that WaPo poll believe college athletes should be able to profit off their likenesses. It was data in the poll, and it was mentioned in the accompanying article. I happen to think it's relevant; you're allowed to disagree, but that doesn't stop it from being a fact.

"Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it, malice may destroy it, but there it is." -- Winston Churchill.
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

Cheeks

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 3351
  • Feeling Super Duper Super
Re: California to pass bill called "fair pay to play act"...to compensate players
« Reply #422 on: September 18, 2019, 11:55:34 PM »
Well, you're wrong again: That linked article merely refers back to the WaPo poll.

I have not been talking about athletes getting paid, as the Seton Hall poll does. I - and numerous other Scoopers - have been talking about athletes being allowed to profit off their likenesses.

So ... again ... 66 percent of Americans say college athletes should be allowed to earn money for the use of their names and likenesses.

I specifically mentioned that - bolded it and blued it - and yet you squirmily tried to pull a fast one by referring back to a subject we weren't even discussing. That's Hoopaloopin' 101 right there.

As it turns out, not only didn't your link refute what I said, your link confirmed it ... so thanks!

Finally, I'm not sure why a fact is "playing the race card." The vast majority of college football and basketball players are black, and 89% of black respondents to that WaPo poll believe college athletes should be able to profit off their likenesses. It was data in the poll, and it was mentioned in the accompanying article. I happen to think it's relevant; you're allowed to disagree, but that doesn't stop it from being a fact.

"Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it, malice may destroy it, but there it is." -- Winston Churchill.

Classic


You want student athletes COMPENSATED for their likeness and at the same time try, with a straight face, to say you aren’t talking about them getting paid.

Holy unnatural carnal knowledge


The amount of crazy with some here is hitting a new level.   They would be getting paid because they are athletes....are you really suggesting this isn’t compensation?  Do you think the federal gov’t will tax it as income?   Lol.  Of course they will, because it is.  Play your game with someone else....this is compensation plain and simple.


“Christmas is a season not only of rejoicing but of reflection.” Winston Churchill

“If you have an important point to make, don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time-a tremendous whack.”  Winston Churchill
« Last Edit: Today at 12:07:53 AM by Cheeks »
"It's a crapshoot.  You have to be lucky."
Head Coach Roy Williams

MU82

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 11930
Classic


You want student athletes COMPENSATED for their likeness and at the same time try, with a straight face, to say you aren’t talking about them getting paid.

Holy unnatural carnal knowledge


The amount of crazy with some here is hitting a new level.   They would be getting paid because they are athletes....are you really suggesting this isn’t compensation?  Do you think the federal gov’t will tax it as income?   Lol.  Of course they will, because it is.  Play your game with someone else....this is compensation plain and simple.

Bravo, hoopy! Great deflection! Great lies! Great hoopaloopin'!

Even though you knew EXACTLY what several Scoopers were talking about -- in this particular case, even though I highlighted it, bold-faced it and put it in blue -- you now are trying to claim we were talking about something different.

You were wrong, you tried to get away with lying, and you were caught. And now you are too hoopaloopy to admit to it. Attaboy.
"I'm not for abortion. But I'm not against it, either. I don't care what your religious beliefs are on anything - if you have a d1ck, you need to shut the f%ck up on this one. Seriously. This is theirs."

-- Dave Chappelle

TAMU Eagle

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 15908
  • A Reading from Wojo's 1st Slide to the Marquettens
Several reasons.  For the jobs thing to work to pull off a scam you need a lot of people in on it.  You hire the USC football player to do nothing much and get paid, the UCLA alum in the office is saying WTF.  Lots of whistleblowers potentially around.  The NCAA has to regulate it, but not as difficult.  Pay stubs, market rates, etc. 

Advertising on one’s likeness, is open ended without a limit.  That internship a kid does has guardrails of what the market will bear, but endorsements is a whole new ballgame. I can decide to pay 5 star recruit whatever the hell I want....or in a big city with 1000’s of opportunities, I get 50 alum businesses to do it.  Scale.  Scale.  Scale.  In my line of work I have paid super star athletes as little as $300K to do an endorsement and others millions of dollars for the same service.  There is no set limit.  The possibility for abuse in this area is mind boggling how easy and counterproductive to the mission of college athletics.

So if the NCAA found a successful way to regulate it, this particular point wouldn't be an issue for you? Again, not trying to play the "gotcha" game, trying to understand.

I disagree with your comment there is only one logical argument...there are many and have been articulated here.  Even in the “100” poll of “coaches” that has been brought up here, Title IX is brought up by some as a landline, as it should be.  Tebow’s argument I find compelling as well as others.  And just wait until you get into disharmony, holdouts, and other wonderful pleasantries this is going to cause.  No longer are these kids representing the university, they are representing Bob’s Toyota and Chick Fil A first.

Anyone making a Title IX argument on this has literally no idea what they are talking about.

I can't say I know what Tebow's argument is.

I don't buy the argument that players won't represent the university. I happen to agree with you that most of the value from a player's likeness comes from their affiliation with the university. If a player no longer represents the university, he no longer has most of his value and his endorsement goes away with it.
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

~Prayer of the Scooper