America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 years ago by Phil222. 32 replies replies.
California Clashes with NCAA
Phil222 Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Lawmakers have sent the governor a bill to allow athletes at California colleges to hire agents and sign endorsement deals.

It sets up a confrontation with the NCAA that could jeopardize the athletic futures of powerhouse programs like USC, UCLA and Stanford.

The bill would allow athletes at California schools to hire agents and be paid for the use of their name, image or likeness. It would stop universities and the NCAA from banning athletes that take the money.

The Senate passed the bill 39-0 on Wednesday, a few days after it got an endorsement from NBA superstar LeBron James.

It now goes to Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has not said whether he'll sign it.

The NCAA Board of Governors sent a letter Wednesday to Newsom saying the bill would eventually stop California colleges from participating in NCAA competitions.

In the six-paragraph letter to Newsom, the board said the bill would give California schools an unfair recruiting advantage. As a result, the letter says, the NCAA would declare those schools ineligible for its events.

Continued here:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/sports/california-sets-clash-ncaa-passing-bill-allowing-college-athletes-get-n1052886

College athletics is a billion dollar industry and I’ve been a proponent of allowing some sort of legal compensation for athletes for a very long time. It seems that some other states might follow California’s lead with this one and try to pass similar legislation.

Andrew Yang touched on this subject in his presidential platform, and has said recently that he would attempt to pass something like this on a national level if elected president.

What do you think? Should players be allowed to make money from their abilities, or would this lead to the downfall of college athletics?
clintCigar Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 05-14-2019
Posts: 4,682
I feel like too much money is made of those poor college kids for them to not get a dime. It's ridiculous. I'm not sayin they should be millionaires but they should get something. Too much money at that age can be a bad thing.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
they need to be able to make money, but not like this... this will be disastrous and, if it gains traction, will be the end of college sports as we know it...

the much easier way to deal with this would've been to say, anytime the program makes any kind of financial gain from promotion of the student athletes, the athletes are to be given X% of that money...

once these kids start getting agents and negotiating contracts and sponsors, they won't need to go to school anymore, nor will they have the time... they've got a job... "College football" will quickly become "college-age football"...
delta1 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
buncha BS, they can't bar CA......oooops....I read NAACP....never mind...
clintCigar Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 05-14-2019
Posts: 4,682
opelmanta1900 wrote:
they need to be able to make money, but not like this... this will be disastrous and, if it gains traction, will be the end of college sports as we know it...

the much easier way to deal with this would've been to say, anytime the program makes any kind of financial gain from promotion of the student athletes, the athletes are to be given X% of that money...

once these kids start getting agents and negotiating contracts and sponsors, they won't need to go to school anymore, nor will they have the time... they've got a job... "College football" will quickly become "college-age football"...

Agreed
Krazeehorse Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 04-09-2010
Posts: 1,958
They spend a lot of time preparing. See what he average non-athlete student makes in their part time jobs and give them a stipend. Not a piece of the action.
tailgater Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
You mean should players be able to get compensation OVER AND ABOVE the $200,000 "education" that allows them to showcase their skills to become millionaire pros?


If these schools want to participate in NCAA sports, they need to follow NCAA rules.

Petition the NCAA. Don't drag the courts into this.




delta1 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
high schools are next...
ZRX1200 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
Problem is, once they start getting paid then their tax exemption for their scholarships.....it’s a no win.

IMO the NCAA should quit promoting and selling individual jerseys or have a profit sharing deal for when they graduate. There’s got to be a decent answer that doesn’t interfere more than it should.
rfenst Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,112
Good morning
Buckwheat Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
Let me be the first to congratulate California in solving all of their problems (i.e. homelessness, poverty, illegal emigrates, etc., etc., etc.) so that they could devote tax payer dollars to tackle this problem that effects the state as a whole. fog Beer
teedubbya Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I’m not taking a position on this because I’m torn and haven’t decided where I fall.

I’m trying to reconcile things with smaller government, less regulation, more competition, personal freedoms and rights, etc.

tailgater Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
I’m not taking a position on this because I’m torn and haven’t decided where I fall.




Never stopped me.

DrafterX Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
teedubbya wrote:


I'm all out of faith
This is how I feel, I'm cold and I'm ashamed
Bound and broken on the floor
You're a little late
I'm already torn

Torn
Torn




freak... Mellow
Phil222 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
It appears that CA signed this bill yesterday. The new law takes effect in 2023 and will give CA universities a HUGE advantage in recruiting over the rest of the country.

Will we see a domino effect with other states passing similar legislation that will ultimately force the NCAA to change the rules, or will some of the nations top schools suddenly be banned from athletic competition with the NCAA? Are there any legal avenues the NCAA could take to fight back?

This could get interesting.
delta1 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,754
gotta do something to stop the SEC from poaching most of the top tier athletes from CA...
tailgater Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I don't care for the NCAA.
But I hope they ban the schools that allow this.

Speyside Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Why Tail? I am curious why you think that is the correct option.
pacman357 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 02-27-2006
Posts: 42,596
The rule needs to be uniform nationwide, or recruiting will be insane. Come to think of it, this feels like the cusp of recruiting becoming a bidding war. Great. Will be looking forward to the Clemson-Alabama National Championship that is already pretty much going to happen most years anyway.

BTW, I saw that there is another poll ranking football teams now. There's the AP, and I'm not sure if the coaches' poll or UPI is still around, but an Amway poll? Saw that in the Seattle Times. So what, you recruit ten lower-ranked teams, and you move up a spot, but you have 100 years' worth of paper towels to store?
fishinguitarman Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2006
Posts: 69,148
Gee billy Bob we can get scholarships and smoke weed and get paid to do it in CA!!!
tailgater Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
The NCAA is a governing body for collegiate sports.
To participate, those teams agree to abide by their rules.

CA is telling their student athletes that they don't need to follow the rules.

And they're doing it because they feel the NCAA is taking more than their fair share.

Nevermind that it is through the NCAA programs that allow these schools to make millions. And it allows these schools to provide scholarships to kids who otherwise might not be able to go to school.
No. that's not enough.
Because the NCAA makes even more.

Maybe it's a conversation that needs to take place.
Maybe the kids should get endorsements.
But it's prone to abuse, and if allowed is likely to lead to geographical favoritism.
Why would a kid go to Iowa when he can make more in endorsements from southern CA?

If the state of CA wants to build a new athletic governance, fine.
But to ignore the rules and make state laws to bypass them is beyond ridiculous.



Phil222 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
There has been illegal compensation for athletes since probably the beginning of organized sports, and my comments on this matter are in regards to what will be considered legal compensation in the state of California under this new law.

It is important to note that this law does not require the school or NCAA to share any money they make from college athletics with the athletes. I have a feeling that most schools in California and around the country share similar views with the NCAA in regards to athletes and monetary compensation.

Looking at this from the standpoint of a college sports fan, I hate the idea of players being paid. I believe this new law will be a stepping stone to far more drastic changes that will ultimately change college athletics in a way that I would consider to be negative.

That being said, it was mainly the NCAA and the schools that opened up Pandora’s box with the whole monetary aspect a long time ago. I don’t blame the athletes for wanting to be involved with that aspect too. Looking at this merely from a humanist perspective, I fully support an athlete's right to seek out compensation above what is currently offered by the school as long as it doesn’t interfere with their agreed upon obligations to the university.

For the vast majority of these kids, this will be the only opportunity for them to make money in a field which has taken them many years of hard work and dedication to achieve this level of success. I would also add that many of these kids do not come from wealthy backgrounds, and this money could be life changing for them and their families. If John or Jane Student wants to try and make money from a clothing line, YouTube channel, or do a commercial for the local mattress warehouse, I could care less. That same thought process applies to John or Jane Athlete.

I see nothing wrong with putting legislative pressure on what is essentially a billion dollar monopoly, and currently feel like this legislation is a reasonable middle-ground between the athletes and owners.
Speyside Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Thank you.
tailgater Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:


For the vast majority of these kids, this will be the only opportunity for them to make money in a field which has taken them many years of hard work and dedication to achieve this level of success. I would also add that many of these kids do not come from wealthy backgrounds, and this money could be life changing for them and their families. If John or Jane Student wants to try and make money from a clothing line, YouTube channel, or do a commercial for the local mattress warehouse, I could care less. That same thought process applies to John or Jane Athlete.



These kids get free college. At schools that would cost $200k++ otherwise.

The perception is these kids are getting screwed.
Simply because the NCAA makes MORE.

If today was the first day you ever heard of college athletics, and your kid were offered free schooling at a top notch school to play some basketball, I bet you'd be thrilled.
Probably have ZERO complaints, right?

Would that perspective change simply because you learn the NCAA is making money off your kids abilities?


Phil222 Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
Not every school costs $200,000, and not all of the players stay until graduation. Some are cut. Some get injured and leave, etc. Some of those who would be able to earn the biggest incomes outside of school only stay for one year before turning professional.

If a scholarship is truly adequate compensation for what some of these athletes bring to the table, then why do so many of them get paid big money/gifts/benefits/ under the table?

They must be bringing value to these schools that far exceeds the benefits of those scholarships, correct? And if they have the ability to bring that value to these schools and the NCAA, then should they not be adequately and legally compensated for it?

And to answer your questions broadly I would say that, YES, money certainly has the ability to change people's perspectives....morals...ethics...name it.
MACS Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,599
Buckwheat wrote:
Let me be the first to congratulate California in solving all of their problems (i.e. homelessness, poverty, illegal emigrates, etc., etc., etc.) so that they could devote tax payer dollars to tackle this problem that effects the state as a whole. fog Beer


We agree on that, fuh sho!

This state has far too many leftist caused problems to be worried about paying college athletes and devoting their time in office to this, and not the real issues you just mentioned.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Phil222 wrote:
Not every school costs $200,000, and not all of the players stay until graduation. Some are cut. Some get injured and leave, etc. Some of those who would be able to earn the biggest incomes outside of school only stay for one year before turning professional.

If a scholarship is truly adequate compensation for what some of these athletes bring to the table, then why do so many of them get paid big money/gifts/benefits/ under the table?

They must be bringing value to these schools that far exceeds the benefits of those scholarships, correct? And if they have the ability to bring that value to these schools and the NCAA, then should they not be adequately and legally compensated for it?

And to answer your questions broadly I would say that, YES, money certainly has the ability to change people's perspectives....morals...ethics...name it.


all of this and, I've known some college ball players from big schools... they didn't get a $200k education... they may have graduated, but edumacated theys is nots...
dstieger Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
I expect that enrollment in Sports Management educational programs will go through the roof....fast.

Agents will be big winners here.

And, there's going to be near-term job openings for about 130 positions requiring a sports finance/legal mix. Here comes caps and freshman minimums and ....holy crap, can you imagine free agency???? ....mid major walk WR on has Heisman-esque freshman season --- bids will be coming from every corner of the NFL, CFL and every bowl conference team...gonna be nuts

So....how come the NFL never created a viable minor league to mitigate this coming mess? Collusion with NCAA?
tailgater Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Phil222 wrote:
Not every school costs $200,000, and not all of the players stay until graduation. Some are cut. Some get injured and leave, etc. Some of those who would be able to earn the biggest incomes outside of school only stay for one year before turning professional.

If a scholarship is truly adequate compensation for what some of these athletes bring to the table, then why do so many of them get paid big money/gifts/benefits/ under the table?

They must be bringing value to these schools that far exceeds the benefits of those scholarships, correct? And if they have the ability to bring that value to these schools and the NCAA, then should they not be adequately and legally compensated for it?

And to answer your questions broadly I would say that, YES, money certainly has the ability to change people's perspectives....morals...ethics...name it.


The lower schools will remain unaffected, since the endorsement dollars aren't likely to trickle down that far.
If the kids that exceed expectations bring benefits that "far exceed" the scholarship value should get paid, then shouldn't the inverse be true? Shouldn't those who fall short of expectations then be dismissed? And I'm not talking failures. I'm talking decent players that maybe don't start but still make the team and get the grades.

It's a slippery slope and in my opinion it's not up to the state to redefine how a national organization runs. Nobody's rights are being stomped on here. It's simply about money, and how much the NCAA makes. If the NCAA performed their same function but wasn't a financial behemoth nobody would be complaining.
ZRX1200 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
A big advantage when their scholarships are now taxable?

California is finding new ways to tax that is all this is.
tailgater Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
opelmanta1900 wrote:
all of this and, I've known some college ball players from big schools... they didn't get a $200k education... they may have graduated, but edumacated theys is nots...


You'd think the state would be more concerned about this.

Phil222 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 10-01-2017
Posts: 1,911
tailgater wrote:
The lower schools will remain unaffected, since the endorsement dollars aren't likely to trickle down that far.
If the kids that exceed expectations bring benefits that "far exceed" the scholarship value should get paid, then shouldn't the inverse be true? Shouldn't those who fall short of expectations then be dismissed? And I'm not talking failures. I'm talking decent players that maybe don't start but still make the team and get the grades.

It's a slippery slope and in my opinion it's not up to the state to redefine how a national organization runs. Nobody's rights are being stomped on here. It's simply about money, and how much the NCAA makes. If the NCAA performed their same function but wasn't a financial behemoth nobody would be complaining.

I’m pretty sure the kids who underperform for whatever reason already get “dismissed,” and I see no issue if that is the case.

The smaller programs will not remain unaffected. I think you vastly underestimate the market and many different ways these players will be able to make money.

Sure, they probably won’t get anywhere near the amount of money some of the players at bigger schools will be able to bring in, but the money will flow nonetheless.

I imagine many companies are excited they will be able to negotiate directly with the athletes bypassing the schools and NCAA probably signing kids for pennies on the dollar.

I agree this issue is a slippery slope. I also understand your concerns about government interference, but I do believe that sort of thing is warranted in certain situations and we don’t have to agree on that. I appreciate reading your input on the subject either way.

ZRX- I have no idea about any of the tax implications. I wouldn't be suprised if what you stated was true.
Users browsing this topic
Guest