Crowder & Hayward to HOF

[Its DJOver]

So I really don't have a dog in this fight but...  What's to stop the big boosters from letting it be known to any and all top recruits that they're willing to pay 100K to a player to make one appearance in a local car commercial?  The player would be marketing off their own likeness, but I wouldn't exactly call it ethical.  Is doing that legally really better than the shoe companies illegally dropping bags? 

[brewcity77]

Nothing, which is what the shoe companies are already doing and why the top recruits generally congregate at the same 4-5 schools. But then the money goes to the kid instead of the handler. And recruits will still have to base decisions off playing time and opportunity, because if you're taking six figures to be the 13th man at Duke or Kentucky, you aren't getting the exposure needed to be a NBA draft pick anyway.

[Its DJOver]

Say Kansas is filled up, all 13 scholies used.  Top 5 recruit decommits from AZ because Miller finally gets busted.  Self goes to the guy and says "Can't offer you a scholarship, but if you walk-on, day one you do a car commercial you get enough money to pay for your one year of school, plus afford a car, plus very extravagant living expenses".  Kansas is still only at 13 scholarship players and they also get a lottery pick next year.  legal? Yes. Ethical? No.

Is it so bad to say that student athletes are getting a poor deal, but at the same time there is no good solution?  Given the loopholes that are already out there, wouldn't being able to legally pay players just open up exponentially more of them?  I just came up with 2 in what? 5 minutes.  I feel bad for the 1% of student athletes that could be making more money than their degree is worth, but I also think that fixing it for the 1% would provide many more problems for the 99%.

[brewcity77]

Say Kansas is filled up, all 13 scholies used.  Top 5 recruit decommits from AZ because Miller finally gets busted.  Self goes to the guy and says "Can't offer you a scholarship, but if you walk-on, day one you do a car commercial you get enough money to pay for your one year of school, plus afford a car, plus very extravagant living expenses".  Kansas is still only at 13 scholarship players and they also get a lottery pick next year.  legal? Yes. Ethical? No.

Is it so bad to say that student athletes are getting a poor deal, but at the same time there is no good solution?  Given the loopholes that are already out there, wouldn't being able to legally pay players just open up exponentially more of them?  I just came up with 2 in what? 5 minutes.  I feel bad for the 1% of student athletes that could be making more money than their degree is worth, but I also think that fixing it for the 1% would provide many more problems for the 99%.

What's to stop Adidas from doing the same now? Or Kansas forcing someone to transfer? Let's not forget that player will have to pay their tuition, which will reduce the value of their endorsements. And if you think that won't piss off the guys who are now lining up behind a walk on for minutes that saw themselves as lottery picks, you're crazy.

You're coming up with Chicken Little scenarios that are no more offensive than Louisville hosting hooker parties, Duke & Kansas in a bidding war for Zion, or any of the other things that are already actually occurring. And one system says "oh, your OWN FACE, you can't profit from that, but the school you play for can use those images in perpetuity."

And I'd be willing to bet more like 99% of the current student athletes in revenue sports, scholarship & walk on alike, would benefit.

[Its DJOver]

What's to stop Adidas from doing the same now? Or Kansas forcing someone to transfer? Let's not forget that player will have to pay their tuition, which will reduce the value of their endorsements. And if you think that won't piss off the guys who are now lining up behind a walk on for minutes that saw themselves as lottery picks, you're crazy.

You're coming up with Chicken Little scenarios that are no more offensive than Louisville hosting hooker parties, Duke & Kansas in a bidding war for Zion, or any of the other things that are already actually occurring. And one system says "oh, your OWN FACE, you can't profit from that, but the school you play for can use those images in perpetuity."

And I'd be willing to bet more like 99% of the current student athletes in revenue sports, scholarship & walk on alike, would benefit.

The point is that no matter how bad it is now, there is always room for it to get worse. 

There are problems with the current system, but I have yet to see a proposal that fixes them without creating a plethora of new bigger problems.  It sounds like you're proposing that recruiting should mirror a cattle auction.

[brewcity77]

No, I'm proposing that a student's face and the rights to it belong to the student, just like it does for every other student. That's it.

[The Sultan]

Recruting is already a cattle auction.  It just has "rules" that many routinely ignore.

[Its DJOver]

No, I'm proposing that a student's face and the rights to it belong to the student, just like it does for every other student. That's it.

But it will never be that simple, and you know it.  You're saying that all the money that Adidas and Nike are throwing at these high schooler's is bad.  I agree. However, I do not think that the solution is to add more money to the equation.   

[Its DJOver]

Recruting is already a cattle auction.  It just has "rules" that many routinely ignore.

How much did Markus cost?
What's the going rate for Suggs?
If you really believe that, why haven't you started a gofundme to get Baldwin?

[The Sultan]

How much did Markus cost?
What's the going rate for Suggs?
If you really believe that, why haven't you started a gofundme to get Baldwin?

No idea.
No idea.
Why would I do that?

If the local car dealership wants to pay Markus $5,000 to hang out for an afternoon, they should be able to do that.  If Nike wants to pay someone $10,000 to come to school at Marquette, they should be able to do that.

[Its DJOver]

Disagree, but that's fine.  As I said, i'm trying not to have a dog in this fight.  I've stated my case on why I think paying players is too slippery of a slope, and I'll leave it at that.

[brewcity77]

But it will never be that simple, and you know it.  You're saying that all the money that Adidas and Nike are throwing at these high schooler's is bad.  I agree. However, I do not think that the solution is to add more money to the equation.   

It literally is exactly that simple. Let them earn the value the market dictates they are worth. That's already happening, but it's benefiting handlers instead of the student athletes much of the time. I would rather the SAs benefit from their worth than their uncles, cousins, high school coaches, neighbors, and whatever other handlers are out there.

And the money in the equation is already there. That genie is never going back in the bottle. We're probably 50 years past that point.

[Pakuni]

The point is that no matter how bad it is now, there is always room for it to get worse. 

There are problems with the current system, but I have yet to see a proposal that fixes them without creating a plethora of new bigger problems.  It sounds like you're proposing that recruiting should mirror a cattle auction.

It's worth noting that your overriding concern here is the system possibly becoming more complicated for the schools, not whether the system is fair for their labor, aka the players.

[Its DJOver]

It literally is exactly that simple. Let them earn the value the market dictates they are worth.

Agree to disagree.  Nothing is that simple.

It's worth noting that your overriding concern here is the system possibly becoming more complicated for the schools, not whether the system is fair for their labor, aka the players.

Not sure where you're getting this from

I feel bad for the 1% of student athletes that could be making more money than their degree is worth, but I also think that fixing it for the 1% would provide many more problems for the 99%.

[Cheeks]

Stop making the ncaa fulfill a wet dream for some of you.  The sooner they allow freshmen to go to the pros and more guys go...the better.  Then this nonsense will stop.  You want to get paid...go pro.  Period.

[Shooter McGavin]

It literally is exactly that simple. Let them earn the value the market dictates they are worth. That's already happening, but it's benefiting handlers instead of the student athletes much of the time. I would rather the SAs benefit from their worth than their uncles, cousins, high school coaches, neighbors, and whatever other handlers are out there.

And the money in the equation is already there. That genie is never going back in the bottle. We're probably 50 years past that point.

I get what you are saying.  I guess I'm concerned that it would be more than simply shoe companies and car dealerships paying players for their likeness.  I believe it would effect the rest of the University's student athletes and students in general.  In a free market with no cap on what could be spent,  University and athletic department officials would ultimately have to spend a great deal of their time talking to donors who own businesses to pay b-ball and football players for their likeness rather than donating to the general scholarship fund.   

[MU82]

No, I'm proposing that a student's face and the rights to it belong to the student, just like it does for every other student. That's it.

Yep.

[Cheeks]

Yep.

That's fine....go pro and use your likeness all you want.  Again the irony....the "other student" no one wants their photo.  I propose the student athlete pay the school for giving them a platform where someone cares enough to want their likeness, for without that platform they wouldn't care.  Let's have the players reimburse for all the value add being given by the conference, the fact that the school has to sell tickets, give them a safe environment to play, sets up media interviews for them, pushes media relations matters to benefit them, etc.

It's truly amazing how much the schools, conferences, etc do for the student athletes, but to hear the arguments here it is only the players.....the super exploited players.   .   At the end of the day the student athletes make out way ahead of the game then when they went in.

[MU82]

That's fine....go pro and use your likeness all you want.  Again the irony....the "other student" no one wants their photo.  I propose the student athlete pay the school for giving them a platform where someone cares enough to want their likeness, for without that platform they wouldn't care.  Let's have the players reimburse for all the value add being given by the conference, the fact that the school has to sell tickets, give them a safe environment to play, sets up media interviews for them, pushes media relations matters to benefit them, etc.

It's truly amazing how much the schools, conferences, etc do for the student athletes, but to hear the arguments here it is only the players.....the super exploited players.   .   At the end of the day the student athletes make out way ahead of the game then when they went in.

Ignoring

[Shooter McGavin]

MU82,

I understand you may not like Cheeks as a poster.  But he makes very good points in his post above.  The fact that these benefits are ignored is dumb founding to me.  I wish all my kids could get the benefits these non professionals are getting. 

I can at least acknowledge the merits of the other side of the argument.  I don't feel that many here can do the same for the current model.

In my opinion, the first sentence of this discussion from the other side should be "I understand the vast majority of these players are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods and services for their skills already but I don't feel they are......."

[Shooter McGavin]

The next part of the sentence I'm sure will be "paid enough".  But we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. 

I am officially letting it go now.  I appreciate all you guys.

[brewcity77]

I understand you may not like Cheeks as a poster.  But he makes very good points in his post above.

If amateurism wasn't a total sham, that might be true. But we aren't talking about a local league that only a few people care about, we're talking about a multi-billion dollar business. And we're talking about the members of that business already profiting off those same likenesses.

Frankly, when he says "the other student...no one wants their photo," he is reinforcing my point. The ONLY time students are restricted is when it would cut into the bottom line of the universities.

And if the problem is the the universities will have to work harder to get donations, how is that the problem of the players? If they have to work harder, then do it. The only arguments against players profiting from their likeness is university greed & laziness. If that's the entire crux of the argument, that's a bad argument.

And the argument the players aren't exploited is basically saying "we give them SOMETHING, why should we have to let them earn what they're ACTUALLY worth?" Not wanting the players to earn what they are worth is basically not tipping in a restaurant because the server is earning $2.33/hour and saying they should be happy with that.

[The Sultan]

Stop making the ncaa fulfill a wet dream for some of you.  The sooner they allow freshmen to go to the pros and more guys go...the better.  Then this nonsense will stop.  You want to get paid...go pro.  Period.

Try to be less triggered.

[MU82]

MU82,

I understand you may not like Cheeks as a poster.  But he makes very good points in his post above.  The fact that these benefits are ignored is dumb founding to me.  I wish all my kids could get the benefits these non professionals are getting. 

I can at least acknowledge the merits of the other side of the argument.  I don't feel that many here can do the same for the current model.

In my opinion, the first sentence of this discussion from the other side should be "I understand the vast majority of these players are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods and services for their skills already but I don't feel they are......."

Shooter:

I happen to agree with brewcity (and some others) on this issue. I almost always will side with the athlete/student getting a bigger piece of the pie and the corporation/university and coach/opportunist getting somewhat smaller pieces. I have never gotten why it is OK for the coach to accept millions from Nike or Adidas while the athletes get $0.00 for wearing and showcasing the product.

Like you, I will let it go for now. We all have made our statements, some of us multiple times over the years. The next iteration of this discussion almost surely is only days away, probably in a thread about something totally unrelated.

As for the individual you named in your opening sentence, I am trying really hard not to be sucked into his game of arguing for the sake of arguing. A couple weeks ago, I promised to stop bogging down threads with our little personality clashes. I, for one, have stuck to that promise.

Have a great weekend.

[The Sultan]

MU82,

I understand you may not like Cheeks as a poster.  But he makes very good points in his post above.  The fact that these benefits are ignored is dumb founding to me.  I wish all my kids could get the benefits these non professionals are getting. 

Really no one is arguing they aren't getting a benefit.  What people are arguing is that many high level D1 players are worth MORE than the scholarship they are receiving.  Otherwise the under the table payments wouldn't exist.  It's an artificial cap on compensation that exists for very little legitimate reason.  The NCAA is usually amateurism as a virtue, which is complete rubbish, to make sure that they collect the revenue.

Don't pretend it's due to fairness.  Because if it were about fairness, there are dozens of things they could do to address the income inequities that exists in D1 sports today.  It's about making sure they get theirs by putting an artificial ceiling on compensation - which is really "Un-American" if you want to call it that.