|
|
Post by beavered on Jul 5, 2022 23:55:09 GMT -8
In 2017, California passed a law forbidding state reimbursement on travel to a host of states, many of which are in B1G country. I suspect a loophole was found for bigtime college athletics, but this is going to come under more scrutiny. I believe a bill is in the works to add a handful of additional states based on the recent SCOTUS ruling on Roe v Wade. UCLAs lawyers may have found a legal loophole, but I don't see how allowing university competition isn't a clear violation of the very thing its supposed to prevent. And who knows what loopholes may be closed by updated legislation.
Ultimately though, I think it's the west coast climate agenda that kills it. California overwhelmingly supports the party that holds issues like lowering carbon output as fundamental to their platform. And the voters put their money where their mouths are - taxpayers and residents ultimately pay tens of billions of dollars annually to support programs intended to combat this issue. They're already collectively sacrificing far more financially than UCLA or the B1G stand to gain. Maybe in the current political climate this is one situation where money doesn't talk.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverintheberg on Jul 6, 2022 3:04:01 GMT -8
Interesting. I wonder about the tax exempt status being threatened. With NIL, how is this about amateur sport?
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jul 6, 2022 6:47:17 GMT -8
In 2017, California passed a law forbidding state reimbursement on travel to a host of states, many of which are in B1G country. I suspect a loophole was found for bigtime college athletics, but this is going to come under more scrutiny. I believe a bill is in the works to add a handful of additional states based on the recent SCOTUS ruling on Roe v Wade. UCLAs lawyers may have found a legal loophole, but I don't see how allowing university competition isn't a clear violation of the very thing its supposed to prevent. And who knows what loopholes may be closed by updated legislation. Ultimately though, I think it's the west coast climate agenda that kills it. California overwhelmingly supports the party that holds issues like lowering carbon output as fundamental to their platform. And the voters put their money where their mouths are - taxpayers and residents ultimately pay tens of billions of dollars annually to support programs intended to combat this issue. They're already collectively sacrificing far more financially than UCLA or the B1G stand to gain. Maybe in the current political climate this is one situation where money doesn't talk. Athletic departments pay for their own travel. They do not receive a reimbursement from the state. NIL payments come from outside sources, not the institution itself. So it maintains its non-profit status. The athlete is not being paid to play. He/she is being paid to represent Woodstock's Pizza, or some other business, or because he/she has sold a product, like tee-shirts with his/her likeness, or for running a camp. Clear distinction. |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbred on Jul 6, 2022 7:14:44 GMT -8
That legislation aside, it seems to me that what is benefitting UCLA is hurting Cal. And last I heard Cal had a stadium retro-build they were struggling to pay for. Why did the higher ups in UC academic administration (board of governors, chancellor and staff, or whatever) sign off on something that would benefit one of their universities while potentially seriously weakening another?
I suppose its possible the higher ups didn't have to sign off on anything and that the various athletic departments have more autonomy than I realize.
|
|
cake
Sophomore
Posts: 1,478 
|
Post by cake on Jul 6, 2022 7:40:49 GMT -8
That legislation aside, it seems to me that what is benefitting UCLA is hurting Cal. And last I heard Cal had a stadium retro-build they were struggling to pay for. Why did the higher ups in UC academic administration (board of governors, chancellor and staff, or whatever) sign off on something that would benefit one of their universities while potentially seriously weakening another? I suppose its possible the higher ups didn't have to sign off on anything and that the various athletic departments have more autonomy than I realize. Allegedly, U¢LA is broke. Like, dropping multiple sports broke and they begged and pleaded, saying this was overall best for the UC system. |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbred on Jul 6, 2022 7:54:37 GMT -8
That legislation aside, it seems to me that what is benefitting UCLA is hurting Cal. And last I heard Cal had a stadium retro-build they were struggling to pay for. Why did the higher ups in UC academic administration (board of governors, chancellor and staff, or whatever) sign off on something that would benefit one of their universities while potentially seriously weakening another? I suppose its possible the higher ups didn't have to sign off on anything and that the various athletic departments have more autonomy than I realize. Allegedly, U¢LA is broke. Like, dropping multiple sports broke and they begged and pleaded, saying this was overall best for the UC system. Not saying you're wrong, but makes me wonder all the more why Big 10 wanted UCLA in the first place. Is the USC-UCLA rivalry really that big a deal? I just shake my head at this stuff. Besides being allegedly broke, UCLA will be an Illinois-level also ran on the field. I would have picked the two teams most capable of playing with the Ohio States and Penn States--USC and Oregon. Maybe tradition still trumps reality for some people (read a post saying Big10 wanted ND and Stanford). |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Jul 6, 2022 7:59:54 GMT -8
That legislation aside, it seems to me that what is benefitting UCLA is hurting Cal. And last I heard Cal had a stadium retro-build they were struggling to pay for. Why did the higher ups in UC academic administration (board of governors, chancellor and staff, or whatever) sign off on something that would benefit one of their universities while potentially seriously weakening another? I suppose its possible the higher ups didn't have to sign off on anything and that the various athletic departments have more autonomy than I realize. Allegedly, U¢LA is broke. Like, dropping multiple sports broke and they begged and pleaded, saying this was overall best for the UC system. Yep, over $100M deficit in the last 3 years. They had little choice but to grab any opportunity to address that deficit or shut things down. A lot of that was caused by Covid impacts. The state has a large budget surplus and could have bailed them out, but that obviously didn’t happen. |
|
|
|
Post by beavered on Jul 6, 2022 9:41:01 GMT -8
In 2017, California passed a law forbidding state reimbursement on travel to a host of states, many of which are in B1G country. I suspect a loophole was found for bigtime college athletics, but this is going to come under more scrutiny. I believe a bill is in the works to add a handful of additional states based on the recent SCOTUS ruling on Roe v Wade. UCLAs lawyers may have found a legal loophole, but I don't see how allowing university competition isn't a clear violation of the very thing its supposed to prevent. And who knows what loopholes may be closed by updated legislation. Ultimately though, I think it's the west coast climate agenda that kills it. California overwhelmingly supports the party that holds issues like lowering carbon output as fundamental to their platform. And the voters put their money where their mouths are - taxpayers and residents ultimately pay tens of billions of dollars annually to support programs intended to combat this issue. They're already collectively sacrificing far more financially than UCLA or the B1G stand to gain. Maybe in the current political climate this is one situation where money doesn't talk. Athletic departments pay for their own travel. They do not receive a reimbursement from the state. NIL payments come from outside sources, not the institution itself. So it maintains its non-profit status. The athlete is not being paid to play. He/she is being paid to represent Woodstock's Pizza, or some other business, or because he/she has sold a product, like tee-shirts with his/her likeness, or for running a camp. Clear distinction. I guess you found the loophole. Although, here's guidance copied directly from the California AG site: A state agency, department, board, authority, or commission, including an agency, department, board, authority, or commission of the University
of California, the Board of Regents of the University of California, or the
California State University, and the Legislature shall not do either of the following: (1) Require any of its employees, officers, or members to travel to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a law that voids or repeals, or has the effect of voiding or repealing, existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression or has enacted a law that authorizes or requires discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, including any law that creates an exemption to antidiscrimination laws in order to permit discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression. (2) Approve a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to a stateI added bold for the relevant portions. I stand by my original post - clearly a violation of the spirit of this law, if not the letter. Regardless of who is paying for it, I don't see how sending your state affiliated team to compete in these places isn't "state-sponsored travel". |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jul 6, 2022 10:37:22 GMT -8
Has any state in the Big Ten (Nebraska, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland) passed any such discriminatory laws? So far that nonsense has been limited to the Confederate states.
|
|
|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Jul 6, 2022 10:42:18 GMT -8
Utah is on their list........hasn't seemed to be a problem so far.......
Montana, (where the Gov. is currently vacationing with his security detail) is also on the list.
Seems to be a law with no teeth.
|
|
