|
Post by spudbeaver on Jun 22, 2021 18:30:09 GMT -8
It's called tapping into a donor base. You want that 5 star - contribute to her off season studies in Europe, etc. This will be a disaster for small schools, for small media market schools etc. Because what is a "modest educational-related payment?" that is gloriously undefined and nebulous. But if it goes the way it is expected, athletes will be able to profit from their likeness and receive literal paychecks or some for of revenue sharing. Many people argue this great for the athletes, and I admit, I agree. it IS great for the athlete... But it is terrible for the school overall and for unpopular sports. It will further drive a wedge between the revenue generating sports and the rest of them, It has the makings of massive Title IX implication when you end up needing to pay a football or basketball player thousands of dollars, but can't justify paying a Women's crew member the same... In college, your mass appeal is, in part, driven on your TV time and your schools market presence. Corvallis and Pullman do not have that. Oregon State does not have Great Uncle Phil in their back pocket to fire up the Nike machine and use their leverage to put their guys apparel on every store in the nation. Guys, Oregon State is f%#*ed. Washington State is f%#*ed. all mid-majors are f%#*ed. Parity is gone and any hope we ever had at playoffs in football is f%#*ed. I don't want to be a debbie downer, but I see no way this doesn't go the way all capitalist things go: the haves take everything, the have nots are f%#*ed. Worse, pair this with the better transfer rules, now we can have the joy of developing a player from an unknown to a star only to have them transfer an LA school or a legacy program so they can cash in on the better media exposure for a year before they are drafted. Yeah... we are absolutely f%#*ed. And, of course, I think that in itself begs and honest conversation about the time and the place for "fair market wages". and an honest conversation about capitalism. I am all for a person going out and making their money... don't get me wrong. I am also vehemently opposed to the wins and losses on my football field or basketball court being bought. and that is what will happen. It is why everybody hates the Yankees if you are not a fan. It is why everybody hates the Lakers, if you are not a fan. there are no ambivalent Yankees people. You love them or you hate them. because they buy championships. You love the Lakers or you hate them, because they buy championships. That is one of the current biggest criticism about the NBA (though this year is a huge outlier and honestly very refreshing) that championship super teams are bought. The NFL? well, that salary cap thing is an interesting idea... can that work in line with what SCOTUS just ruled? can you cap "fair market rate" given that Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his opinion: "...cannot justify the NCAA's decision to build a massive money-raising enterprise on the backs of student athletes who are not fairly compensated. Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate," he said, adding: "The NCAA is not above the law." (I'd also challenge Kavanaugh to defend $7.25/hr as being fair market rate... but that is another conversation) Honestly, I think the only way to unf%#* this mess is that all D-1 schools profit share and agree upon a revenue sharing scheme, sort of like the NFL, to booster small market schools and to prevent the inevitable: east coast big market schools from dominating all the talent moreseo than they already do. I’m no lawyer, but I would think Title IX would be out the window. If pay for players was structured smartly it would be donors directly making payments, not the school. Yes? No? Maybe??
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Jun 22, 2021 18:31:22 GMT -8
Y'all act as if the big schools haven't been paying their best players this whole time. And tax student-athlete's tuition/room/board? C'mon, man. Paraphasing Alex Karras on playing in the pros: It’s great, but it’s tough to take the pay cut!
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jun 22, 2021 23:40:38 GMT -8
Y'all act as if the big schools haven't been paying their best players this whole time. And tax student-athlete's tuition/room/board? C'mon, man. Flat out paying these kids is just wrong. I'm not sure it's going that route or not. I can see the kids getting paid for use of their likeness in ads and such I guess, but at some point you have to draw a line if you want parity in competition and between all sports at any given school. According to estimates, it cost the average in state kid 27k a year to go to OSU, the average oit of state kid 47k. These kids are already receiving about 30-50k worth of benefits each year the typical student doesn't, all while getting the opportunity to groom for a pro sport. Seems to me the bulk of the complaints have been from football players. Some of them are freaking pampered. They're getting 30-50k a year and an education while most of their high school buds who were also athletes and good enough to make it to the minor leagues are getting 300-700 a week for 3-4 months if they're lucky. The NCAA should threaten to limit scholarships in football to match baseball and the other sports just to see what these kids will do. Football is one of those sports most kids have to grow into. Few high school grads would be developed enough at any position to go directly to the NFL, most probably wouldn't even get a look at Arena Football if it's still around. They should be thanking the Universities for the opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Jun 23, 2021 9:14:30 GMT -8
Y'all act as if the big schools haven't been paying their best players this whole time. And tax student-athlete's tuition/room/board? C'mon, man. Flat out paying these kids is just wrong. I'm not sure it's going that route or not. I can see the kids getting paid for use of their likeness in ads and such I guess, but at some point you have to draw a line if you want parity in competition and between all sports at any given school. According to estimates, it cost the average in state kid 27k a year to go to OSU, the average oit of state kid 47k. These kids are already receiving about 30-50k worth of benefits each year the typical student doesn't, all while getting the opportunity to groom for a pro sport. Seems to me the bulk of the complaints have been from football players. Some of them are freaking pampered. They're getting 30-50k a year and an education while most of their high school buds who were also athletes and good enough to make it to the minor leagues are getting 300-700 a week for 3-4 months if they're lucky. The NCAA should threaten to limit scholarships in football to match baseball and the other sports just to see what these kids will do. Football is one of those sports most kids have to grow into. Few high school grads would be developed enough at any position to go directly to the NFL, most probably wouldn't even get a look at Arena Football if it's still around. They should be thanking the Universities for the opportunity. Not gonna happen with football and basketball (men's). Far too lucrative for the universities, and sports performance has an impact on overall fund raising.
|
|
EOBeav
Freshman
Posts: 499
Grad Year: 1989, 2002
|
Post by EOBeav on Jun 23, 2021 10:53:58 GMT -8
Flat out paying these kids is just wrong. I'm not sure it's going that route or not. I can see the kids getting paid for use of their likeness in ads and such I guess, but at some point you have to draw a line if you want parity in competition and between all sports at any given school. According to estimates, it cost the average in state kid 27k a year to go to OSU, the average oit of state kid 47k. These kids are already receiving about 30-50k worth of benefits each year the typical student doesn't, all while getting the opportunity to groom for a pro sport. Seems to me the bulk of the complaints have been from football players. Some of them are freaking pampered. They're getting 30-50k a year and an education while most of their high school buds who were also athletes and good enough to make it to the minor leagues are getting 300-700 a week for 3-4 months if they're lucky. The NCAA should threaten to limit scholarships in football to match baseball and the other sports just to see what these kids will do. Football is one of those sports most kids have to grow into. Few high school grads would be developed enough at any position to go directly to the NFL, most probably wouldn't even get a look at Arena Football if it's still around. They should be thanking the Universities for the opportunity. Not gonna happen with football and basketball (men's). Far too lucrative for the universities, and sports performance has an impact on overall fund raising. Very, very few of these kids go on to play anything professionally (although most think they have a shot at doing so). They're sacrificing a lot for that tuition/room/board. Meanwhile, the universities are making a ton of money on their efforts, albeit some institutions more than others. I do not begrudge these full scholarships one bit. My only request is that they realize the privilege and take advantage of the opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jun 23, 2021 12:37:07 GMT -8
Not gonna happen with football and basketball (men's). Far too lucrative for the universities, and sports performance has an impact on overall fund raising. Very, very few of these kids go on to play anything professionally (although most think they have a shot at doing so). They're sacrificing a lot for that tuition/room/board. Meanwhile, the universities are making a ton of money on their efforts, albeit some institutions more than others. I do not begrudge these full scholarships one bit. My only request is that they realize the privilege and take advantage of the opportunity. And a lot of people go tens of thousands of dollars in debt for the same degree with no guarantee of a job and no where near the networking connection being associated with a sports team gets you. A lot of people go tens of thousands of dollars in debt, while working night and weekend jobs on the free time. Sports gets a lot of attention because it is easy to see the money, it is easy to see the insane coaching salaries and the clear disparities involved. But less clear is that these disparities exist on the academic side. A notable example is the much publicized blue pigment discovered by OSU professor Mas Subramanian, or probably more accurately his grad student Andrew Smith. While OSU hasn't really released the details of the licensing arrangements they have made with both the Shepard Color Company and AMD for electronics use, but Bloomberg referred to these pigment breakthroughs as "billion dollar colors". To be sure, Subramanian is a distinguished professor at OSU and one of the highest paid ones at over $230,000 per year. But for Andrew Smith, his reward was basically his PhD and a nice engineer job in industry. His reward was not royalties or any kind of payment inline with the discovery and the revenue generated by this pigment. Don't get me wrong, it made his career... but thesis of the ruling by the supreme court is players to not receive compensation equitable to revenue they generate. Well, neither do grad students. Neither do most engineers in any setting, public or private. My bottom line is I feel this ruling creates more problems than it solves. maybe for better, but likely for worse.
|
|
|
Post by shelby on Jun 23, 2021 12:54:02 GMT -8
Everyone above has the same initial thoughts on how this will affect men's and women's college sports ! I guess there will be some time involved, as well as many negotiations between all parties involved. As already mentioned , the concern should be based on equitable application of whatever ends up being the 'program', and the dark money band of unsavory characters that will ( as usual ), utilize schemes to draw athletes to certain schools and to fill their own pockets ! Does the useless NCAA just disappear ? That would be great - but then who would police such a potentially big dollar 'industry' ? I do not foresee this being the end of amateur athletics - there have to be some open minded, clear thinking, and ethical people that can sew this all together ! Go Beavers !
|
|
|
Post by steelbvr on Jun 24, 2021 7:29:13 GMT -8
I think this will have unattended impacts on the athlete where it will be more negative to most except the very elite players. The student athlete will loose their amateur classification and scholarships will be taxable income. I doubt the universities will gross up the scholarship to cover the state and federal income tax. The elite players will most likely have agents that will further eat into any earning they get. The transfer portal will be severely impacted. I am sure universities will have athletes sign contracts of 4 years or more since they are employees of the university now. This whole thing will be a mess. I also don’t see Title 9 going away leaving universities to focus on what sports they compete. Killing off most other sports than revenue generating sports.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Jun 28, 2021 12:58:51 GMT -8
Very, very few of these kids go on to play anything professionally (although most think they have a shot at doing so). They're sacrificing a lot for that tuition/room/board. Meanwhile, the universities are making a ton of money on their efforts, albeit some institutions more than others. I do not begrudge these full scholarships one bit. My only request is that they realize the privilege and take advantage of the opportunity. And a lot of people go tens of thousands of dollars in debt for the same degree with no guarantee of a job and no where near the networking connection being associated with a sports team gets you. A lot of people go tens of thousands of dollars in debt, while working night and weekend jobs on the free time. Sports gets a lot of attention because it is easy to see the money, it is easy to see the insane coaching salaries and the clear disparities involved. But less clear is that these disparities exist on the academic side. A notable example is the much publicized blue pigment discovered by OSU professor Mas Subramanian, or probably more accurately his grad student Andrew Smith. While OSU hasn't really released the details of the licensing arrangements they have made with both the Shepard Color Company and AMD for electronics use, but Bloomberg referred to these pigment breakthroughs as "billion dollar colors". To be sure, Subramanian is a distinguished professor at OSU and one of the highest paid ones at over $230,000 per year. But for Andrew Smith, his reward was basically his PhD and a nice engineer job in industry. His reward was not royalties or any kind of payment inline with the discovery and the revenue generated by this pigment. Don't get me wrong, it made his career... but thesis of the ruling by the supreme court is players to not receive compensation equitable to revenue they generate. Well, neither do grad students. Neither do most engineers in any setting, public or private. My bottom line is I feel this ruling creates more problems than it solves. maybe for better, but likely for worse. The idea that an organization would reap huge benefits from an individual contrinutor while that individual contributor does not reap in a representative way, is like the basis of all successful organizations. Another example from academia, specifically Oregon State. NuScale power was born out of OSU's nuclear Engineering program, specifically Dr. Reyes, who left to start NuScale. The nuclear industry is extremely slow, so NuScale hasn't built a power plant yet, but they are on the cusp of it, and made history being the first SMR to get approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commision, and in fact the first approval of any design in many years. Dr. Reyes, his graduate students, all of the people who work for NuScale, OSU... how much will they profit from a successful NuScale? I am sure they will all be fairly paid, and can all afford a house in Corvallis, but none of them will be seeing the potential billions of dollars, that will mosty be going to early investors and large share holders. and of course we will ALL benefit if Nuclear power can overtake carbon based power, and maybe we can start working on not having 108 degree days in Oregon Another Corvallis based example. The Inkect printer head was invented and designed right here in the facility off of circle blvd. A $100 Billion dollar a year buisness was started right here in corvallis. Did any of those inventors and engineers become billionaires? Nope. But have we ALL benefited from the many millions of dollars of salary, buisness, spinoffs, and infrastructure HP brought in. I certainly have, I live in this town because my dad got a job at HP many moons ago. So were those professors, inventors, and engineers taken advantage of? I don't know, maybe? They certainly wouldn't have been able to do what they did without the support of the organizations they did it for though. Same with a football player. He has to have a team to play for or his INL becomes worthless. I certainly want players to have more ability to profit from their INL, but these are some muddy waters that will need to be carefully navigated, and quite frankly I don't trust anyone in the college sports world to be able to do it.
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jun 28, 2021 21:05:49 GMT -8
To balance stuff out the best we can, I would go:
1. Schools are limited to five year scholarships per athlete, to cover tuition, books, room, board and minimal necessary living expenses (laundry detergent, e.g). 2. Said scholarships are tax exempt. 3. Any and all athletes may market their name, image and likeness to the best of their ability. Any such gains are taxable as income. 4. Out of conference transfers must sit out one year and transfers within conference must sit out two. Years that the athletes sit out count against eligibility. 5. Athletes have 4.5 years of eligibility, no exceptions.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Jun 28, 2021 21:08:47 GMT -8
To balance stuff out the best we can, I would go: 1. Schools are limited to five year scholarships per athlete, to cover tuition, books, room, board and minimal necessary living expenses (laundry detergent, e.g). 2. Said scholarships are tax exempt. 3. Any and all athletes may market their name, image and likeness to the best of their ability. Any such gains are taxable as income. 4. Out of conference transfers must sit out one year and transfers within conference must sit out two. Years that the athletes sit out count against eligibility. 5. Athletes have 4.5 years of eligibility, no exceptions. That’s about as balanced as a US Government budget!
|
|
|
Post by seastape on Jun 28, 2021 21:13:31 GMT -8
To balance stuff out the best we can, I would go: 1. Schools are limited to five year scholarships per athlete, to cover tuition, books, room, board and minimal necessary living expenses (laundry detergent, e.g). 2. Said scholarships are tax exempt. 3. Any and all athletes may market their name, image and likeness to the best of their ability. Any such gains are taxable as income. 4. Out of conference transfers must sit out one year and transfers within conference must sit out two. Years that the athletes sit out count against eligibility. 5. Athletes have 4.5 years of eligibility, no exceptions. That’s about as balanced as a US Government budget! Agreed, but I think athletes being able to sell their NIL is here to stay. I also think schools have to be able to afford an athletic department, and paying athletes beyond what has become the typical scholarship can really get out of hand...it's a fairness rule, like a salary cap. Schools like OSU and WSU are probably going to get crushed anyway...just like they are now...when it comes to recruiting.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Jun 29, 2021 9:19:19 GMT -8
That’s about as balanced as a US Government budget! Agreed, but I think athletes being able to sell their NIL is here to stay. I also think schools have to be able to afford an athletic department, and paying athletes beyond what has become the typical scholarship can really get out of hand...it's a fairness rule, like a salary cap. Schools like OSU and WSU are probably going to get crushed anyway...just like they are now...when it comes to recruiting. Doesnt change that the big markets and haves will just take more, but it shouldnt cost the schools any more money right? The player would be selling their INL rights to local companies to advertise, to ESPN, to Nike, etc. Right?
|
|
|
Post by shelby on Jun 29, 2021 10:15:17 GMT -8
So Nike University can cheat the system even more ? There will have to be limits and numbers imposed on ALL SCHOOLS !
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Jun 29, 2021 10:32:00 GMT -8
totally agree. So many students end up with tons of student debt, many can't even afford food. Whoosh. beavobill is talking about student-athletes. If student-athletes are not amateurs and can be paid, then all benefits that they receive should properly be taxable income. As usual, a few will prosper at the expense of the many. I will miss this all, when this is all gone. Oh well, we had a good run. Except educational expenses are deductable from gross income. So, would you rather not have them taxable OR increase IRS bureaucracy to query athletes claiming deductions?
|
|