Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 80
  1. #13

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by blah3 View Post
    What the ruling does not mean

    Monday's ruling does not open up the floodgates for student-athlete compensation.

    In upholding lower-court rulings, the court's decision is narrowly focused on benefits linked to academics and does not tackle the question of whether students may be paid a salary for participating in college athletics.

    The ruling also does not require that schools provide these sorts of allowances.
    Yeah, some seem to be jumping the gun to thinking there will be essentially college payroll's for players. While that may...may eventually be the case, all these kids are asking for right now is to be able to make money off their likenesses. These jerseys that they are selling with their numbers on them for $100+ dollars, the kids should be getting a piece of that money. The ones that can do commercials (the commercials are already highlights of the players playing), autograph sessions, Video games, things like that...they should be allowed to make some money off it just like any other person in this country can.
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.





  2. #14

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Yeah, some seem to be jumping the gun to thinking there will be essentially college payroll's for players. While that may...may eventually be the case, all these kids are asking for right now is to be able to make money off their likenesses.
    And they'll probably win the right to do that soon.
    "This space for rent" - Roger Goodell





  3. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    32,201
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn View Post
    Yeah, some seem to be jumping the gun to thinking there will be essentially college payroll's for players. While that may...may eventually be the case, all these kids are asking for right now is to be able to make money off their likenesses. These jerseys that they are selling with their numbers on them for $100+ dollars, the kids should be getting a piece of that money. The ones that can do commercials (the commercials are already highlights of the players playing), autograph sessions, Video games, things like that...they should be allowed to make some money off it just like any other person in this country can.
    Just to play Devil's Advocate, if players make money/get royalties "off their likenesses", shouldn't they be paying for their own education (if that's what we want to call it)? They certainly would be entitled to their fair share, but would be wearing the jerseys of college "X" too. They wouldn't make a dime if they had their likeness on a blank Tee shirt. IMO it's a quid pro quo = get to stay in a dorm, eat chow, go to class (if you choose to get a free degree), for your service on the playing field. Then take your chances, as we all do in life, to get drafted by a professional team with the dream of making million$ doing what you love to do best... Bc





  4. #16

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    Just to play Devil's Advocate, if players make money/get royalties "off their likenesses", shouldn't they be paying for their own education (if that's what we want to call it)? They certainly would be entitled to their fair share, but would be wearing the jerseys of college "X" too. They wouldn't make a dime if they had their likeness on a blank Tee shirt. IMO it's a quid pro quo = get to stay in a dorm, eat chow, go to class (if you choose to get a free degree), for your service on the playing field. Then take your chances, as we all do in life, to get drafted by a professional team with the dream of making million$ doing what you love to do best... Bc
    Bc, firstly very few players actually get drafted here. Secondly, you need to understand just how poor some of these kids are. It’s really sad. And they’re not even allowed to go get a job per NCAA rules. They literally aren’t allowed to make money. You need money in life, even if your immediate needs are covered by the school. I’d be fine if they wanted to give the players even the option of a nice salary or a scholarship or some combo of the two.





  5. #17

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    Just to play Devil's Advocate, if players make money/get royalties "off their likenesses", shouldn't they be paying for their own education (if that's what we want to call it)? They certainly would be entitled to their fair share, but would be wearing the jerseys of college "X" too.
    If they want to do that, sure. Doubtful they would be relevant on any athletic stage with that stance...good luck recruiting kids. College athletics became a business a long time ago and their players are the product. BC, I respect your opinion on that, but come on, it's not 1965 anymore, schools are racking up huge sums of money, they've started athletic conference channels that exclusively show sports and schools are making hand over fist off of this stuff. Even if the Athletic Departments aren't, the schools in general do with publicity/application/donation money due to the notoriety many times of None of that happens without the product which are the players. So there's absolutely nothing stopping schools from doing forcing kids to pay for their tuition, just know that in this business, plenty of schools will gladly continue to pay for full scholarships to continue to make money/be relevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    They wouldn't make a dime if they had their likeness on a blank Tee shirt. IMO it's a quid pro quo = get to stay in a dorm, eat chow, go to class (if you choose to get a free degree), for your service on the playing field. Then take your chances, as we all do in life, to get drafted by a professional team with the dream of making million$ doing what you love to do best... Bc
    What other market thinks giving a room to live in and some free food is a true free market? Sorry, I don't buy the "we feed you and give you a room to live in" is fair market value for kids who may or may not care about a degree. These kids often barely have a free minute from 6am through 8pm every weekday dealing with practice, meetings, workouts, classes, study hall etc. They worked hard and continue to work extremely hard...I think terming a scholarship and room and board free is right at all...they worked their asses off to earn everything they get and IMHO, more including royalties from companies selling their jersey's and television commercials, and more. Those rights aren't stripped away from anyone else yet it seems to be ok only for athletes. Academic scholarship recipients aren't told they can't earn any money despite getting tuition and room and board paid for. Their faces aren't plastered on TV to make TV networks money, or on clothing to make the schools and NCAA money with them not able to receive a dime. Why is it so different for athletes?
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.





  6. #18

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    Just to play Devil's Advocate, if players make money/get royalties "off their likenesses", shouldn't they be paying for their own education (if that's what we want to call it)? They certainly would be entitled to their fair share, but would be wearing the jerseys of college "X" too. They wouldn't make a dime if they had their likeness on a blank Tee shirt. IMO it's a quid pro quo = get to stay in a dorm, eat chow, go to class (if you choose to get a free degree), for your service on the playing field. Then take your chances, as we all do in life, to get drafted by a professional team with the dream of making million$ doing what you love to do best... Bc
    So the school gets to use them for free? And what about the 80-90% of them whose likeness probably isn't worth squat?
    "This space for rent" - Roger Goodell





  7. Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    Just to play Devil's Advocate, if players make money/get royalties "off their likenesses", shouldn't they be paying for their own education (if that's what we want to call it)? They certainly would be entitled to their fair share, but would be wearing the jerseys of college "X" too. They wouldn't make a dime if they had their likeness on a blank Tee shirt. IMO it's a quid pro quo = get to stay in a dorm, eat chow, go to class (if you choose to get a free degree), for your service on the playing field. Then take your chances, as we all do in life, to get drafted by a professional team with the dream of making million$ doing what you love to do best... Bc
    This is why I love economics no emotions just straight facts.


    1. If players make money for their likeness shouldn’t they be paying for their own education?

    This is a weird question because the 2 really have nothing to do with each other. The athlete gets a “free education” because the school is using it as a negotiation tactic to get them to go to that particular school. The school doesn’t “have” to offer a free scholarship to any athlete. They offer it as an incentive to choose their school over another. All athletes aren’t on scholarship by the way.

    Short answer: inconclusive. They have nothing to do with each other.

    2. “They wouldn’t make a dime if it was printed on a blank Tshirt”. - You are just 100% wrong. The name brand will sell on any merchandise, whether a jersey, a t-shirt, a shoe, a hat. Ever heard of big baller brand? They sell t shirts for $150 just because it has BBB on them and it is linked with the ball bothers likeness.

    Furthermore name and likeness goes beyond a Jersey and merchandise. It also goes to endorsement deals. How much money do you think Zion would have made in college for endorsements?

    Id argue more than he would in the NBA as there are many superstars in the NBA and he was the face of NCAA basketball.

    3. Quid pro quo- it’s definitely not. Living in a small funky dorm room and eating free food isn’t fair exchange for 100’s of millions on revenue. Not even close.

    Coaches are making $10m+ per year. As a player I’ll take the $2m per year and rent my own apartment and buy my own food.

    4. So play for free while the organization generations billions, because I have an opportunity to get drafted by another organization, where I’d have to work to earn my money. This is kind of obsurd.

    This is like your current job telling you to work for free because of your lucky and get hired by your next job they will pay you. Um no.





  8. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    32,201
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    This is one of the things I luv about the RSR board, that there is freedom of speech, even if you don't agree with the "speaker" (me LOL) :



    IMO young men who go to college on athletic scholarships are at risk for not being drafted or UDFAs into their chosen sport. They actually may have to pay attention in class to get some sort of degree (Bc rhetorically, do you mean like the rest of us?). If they do get drafted into the NFL, then have the opportunity to make million$, others sadly get cut in Training Camp. I wonder how many of you have sympathy for them (?) Do I mean they may have to go out and earn a living like the majority of us... yes I do. Those in college who are fortunate enough to become stars, and are drafted in the 1st round, will be offered a King's ransom. Alas, those who fail are not. It is actually the same for all of us no matter what profession we choose. For Example : I have a friend who is a dentist, and successful at that, but wanted to become a doctor. He told me I couldn't get into medical school so I switched to a "semi-medical" profession. Good for you Doctor K!

    If you cannot see, or do not agree with, my POV that's OK because you now know where I stand. I thank you for taking the time to read my post even if you don't agree... Bc





  9. #21

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    This is one of the things I luv about the RSR board, that there is freedom of speech, even if you don't agree with the "speaker" (me LOL) :



    IMO young men who go to college on athletic scholarships are at risk for not being drafted or UDFAs into their chosen sport. They actually may have to pay attention in class to get some sort of degree (Bc rhetorically, do you mean like the rest of us?). If they do get drafted into the NFL, then have the opportunity to make million$, others sadly get cut in Training Camp. I wonder how many of you have sympathy for them (?) Do I mean they may have to go out and earn a living like the majority of us... yes I do. Those in college who are fortunate enough to become stars, and are drafted in the 1st round, will be offered a King's ransom. Alas, those who fail are not. It is actually the same for all of us no matter what profession we choose. For Example : I have a friend who is a dentist, and successful at that, but wanted to become a doctor. He told me I couldn't get into medical school so I switched to a "semi-medical" profession. Good for you Doctor K!

    If you cannot see, or do not agree with, my POV that's OK because you now know where I stand. I thank you for taking the time to read my post even if you don't agree... Bc
    BC, I share your value of a degree. No question. However, just like every other of the millions of 18 year old graduates, the decision to go to college is their own. Some kids go to college and some don't. Some degrees allow for a high paying job, some don't. Some kids that don't go to college make good blue collar money via trades or other non degree requiring jobs, some will struggle. In short, I think a degree is a nice thing to have, it opens more doors for graduates. However, not having one is ok as well as long as one is financially stable and happy...athletes that don't get a degree aren't necessarily screwed if they don't make the big leagues, it's up to the person, there are many avenues kids can take once they graduate high school and/or college and the college route isn't for everyone.

    The facts are of course that the vast majority of kids in college sports will not go on to be millionaire pros. Most certainly agreed. I am struggling though to see how that plays into kids who are able to make money off their likeness? Are you suggesting that colleges will no longer offer any kids scholarships because schools may have to pay a select few players 2% of the sale price of their jerseys that are sold?
    Although Walsh's system of offense can compensate for lack of talent; however, defense is a different story. According to Walsh, talent on defense was essential and could not be compensated for. What did Walsh do in 1981? He acquired physical and talented players on defense.





  10. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    49,135
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    It would be a boring board if we all had the same opinion.

    I just paid for my son's 4 year degree and room although he had to work for food and fun money. For guys like me it's tens of thousands so I can confirm the value point.
    World Domination 3 Points at a Time!





  11. #23

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    If The NCAA isn’t careful, college athletics will disappear.

    They must cut this short before salaries, because once Title IX gets ahold of that it is over….

    Getting paid for their likeness is exactly how it needs to go down,. Revenue producers deserve a cut, the women’s ping pong team does not.

    Colleges clearly get this, as athletic scholarships in non-revenue sports are getting harder and harder to get. Watching it right now with my nephew, currently ranked 5th in the nation for the class of 2022, and so far has only gotten offered $15k in merit and zero athletic scholarships, though this summer that is likely to change. Spring sport, nationals are this weekend, time to shine!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





  12. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Sacramento, CA
    Posts
    7,898
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: OT - Supreme Court sides 9-0 against NCAA

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravenswintitle View Post
    It would be a boring board if we all had the same opinion.
    Hold my beer...





Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Link To Mobile Site