The end of the NCAA?

[QuaoarsKing]

But they do get paid.
Almost $30 to 40k per year
Full tuition
All meals
Full room and board
And a monthly spending stipend that is more than most college students get from parents

Benefits aren't salary, especially benefits like "full tuition" that many of them aren't able and/or interested in taking advantage of.

 

[mstateglfr]

Grade school athletes usually don't have marketable skills; they are learning those skills. Even the best high school athlete is almost never physically mature enough to compete with a college age or older athlete.

High school coaches are basically athletic teachers.

I would think the vast majority of high school athletic programs at best break even, but I have no stats to prove that. Just my impression.

Public High School is free, College is not. No one is getting a benefit to attend, except for the education itself.

I doubt if high school athletics change much, but you never know. Just my 2 cents.

LeBron, Zion, etc- all could have cashed in as high schoolers.

 

[40 acres and a mule]

USUALLY. It is impossible to devise a policy that covers 100% of all contingencies.

 

[Ralph Cramden]

As soon as the stars start getting paid the others players will want their fair share cause its a team sport. Then the basketball team. Then the girls basketball team will have to get paid otherwise its sexist and misogynistic. Next thing ya know the Mathletes will be saying where's my share ??

 

[Go Budaw]

So... What's next? Yes, players will be "compensated". Does anything exist to limit the compensation. Will we have an Arch Manning level player making what? Millions? And, playing across from a guy who walked on....

No, no limit whatsoever to the compensation. That was the big news from the ruling. The lawsuit was supposed to be about a very narrow application of additional educational financial benefits being made available. But the actual SCOTUS ruling essentially threw out every compensation rule in their bylaws as being blatantly illegal under antitrust law. I’ll say what I already said again….the NCAA’s entire framework for existence is gone. It’s now time for the Power 5 to collectively give themselves a huge raise, and tell the NCAA where to shove it.

 

[Go Budaw]

I do wonder where this will end. Will it end at college and not affect younger kids? Will high school athletics be changed? Will just prep schools be changed?
Whats the difference between a school and coach making money off of high school football?...is it really just that they make less overall so its OK? If thats the case, then whats the line between OK and improper? Is age the determining factor- 18 or older, then pay em?

Does anyone really give a **** if high school athletes get paid, or where they decide to go to school? It’s 17ing high school.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Have you heard of a little place called Briarcrest?

 

[harrybollocks]

As soon as the stars start getting paid the others players will want their fair share cause its a team sport. Then the basketball team. Then the girls basketball team will have to get paid otherwise its sexist and misogynistic. Next thing ya know the Mathletes will be saying where's my share ??

Players on teams don't make the same. Maybe they'll come up with some low minimum. Anyway, that's kinda already happening to some degree. LSU will have a new baseball coach soon and one making a lot less than the their women's basketball coach. And he'll have fewer scholarships for his players than women's basketball has even though baseball has better attendance and brings in more money. Girls basketball players are given more in scholarship money/value than male baseball players. That's been going on for some time. Title IX is something else. Also, it doesn't help that football gets so many scholarships. Amateur athletics.

 

[mstateglfr]

USUALLY. It is impossible to devise a policy that covers 100% of all contingencies.

Right- its an exception in HS. Its an exception in college too- college gymnasts, rowers, water poloists(?), etc really arent all that marketable. Some college basketball and football players are marketable, and niche areas like a rare baseball player, hockey player, track star, etc too.

My point earlier was that if there are HS kids who are good enough and marketable enough to get paid, then why wouldnt/shouldnt they? If they are bringing in a ton of cash for their school thru games on ESPN, sold out gyms, and clothing sponsorships then is that enough for them to qualify in the same idea and manner as college players? Yes the overall revenue is smaller, but isnt the principle the same?

 

[thatsbaseball]

So when the players turn pro (in school) can they be booed mercilessly without remorse or repercussion when they don't play well ? **

 

[QuaoarsKing]

As soon as the stars start getting paid the others players will want their fair share cause its a team sport. Then the basketball team. Then the girls basketball team will have to get paid otherwise its sexist and misogynistic. Next thing ya know the Mathletes will be saying where's my share ??

If there's a market to pay mathletes, pay them.

 

[Ranchdawg]

Well, the NCAA can't stop a players union like they did a few years ago. It is just a matter of time.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

Did those kids pay to build those gyms that are now sold out? Shouldn’t the tax payers who built the gym get that money in the form of paying for the upkeep of the gym and other school expenses? If the players are so marketable, let them rent their own gym or stadium, hire some teammates, and charge their own admission. A guy in Memphis tried this about 5 years ago with a basketball player committed to UK… it didn’t work.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

If there's a market to pay mathletes, pay them.

Like a scholarship?

 

[SheltonChoked]

Now do baseball players....

 

[maroonmania]

There is a minor league for the NBA. Its existed for 2 decades now.
In recent years, kids have bypassed college and instead played for the NBA's minor league. The NBA has adjusted pay a couple times now specifically to attract the elite who would otherwise play in college.
It exists and players know about it.

Yep, I'm aware that it exists but its not at a level that many kids consider it when coming out of HS. I assume that is because the NBA doesn't pay big signing bonuses to kids that go to the NBDL like MLB does but I don't know. If they are just going to pay peanuts then its not going to help with kids that are just looking for the dollars. A lot of the recruits probably still think they can make out better with recruiting 'benefits' than the NBDL.

 

[ronpolk]

Like a scholarship?

He’s talking about not limiting their ability to earn money based on their name. When Dak was at MSU how many jerseys do you think we sold with the number 15 on it? What would have been so bad about putting Prescott on the back of that and giving Dak a slice? Jake Mangum is currently doing commercials for Farm Bureau. No reason he shouldn’t have been able to do that in college and make some extra money.

 

[johnson86-1]

Right- its an exception in HS. Its an exception in college too- college gymnasts, rowers, water poloists(?), etc really arent all that marketable. Some college basketball and football players are marketable, and niche areas like a rare baseball player, hockey player, track star, etc too.

My point earlier was that if there are HS kids who are good enough and marketable enough to get paid, then why wouldnt/shouldnt they? If they are bringing in a ton of cash for their school thru games on ESPN, sold out gyms, and clothing sponsorships then is that enough for them to qualify in the same idea and manner as college players? Yes the overall revenue is smaller, but isnt the principle the same?

There doesn't appear to be a limiting principle. At best it will just be, there's a lot of money in college sports, they aren't allowed to enforce amateurism; there's not nearly as much money in high school sports, so we will let them enforce amateurism.

It is somewhat unseemly to have rich coaches and administrators and unpaid athletes, but I still feel like schools should be able to agree to have amateur sports, whether at high school or college. Maybe the only way to do it in a principled manner is to have unpaid coaches and players with no scholarships at all, but if you allow any compensation beyond providing equipment then you are no longer an amateur organization and can't restrict compensation at all.

 

[40 acres and a mule]

Right- its an exception in HS. Its an exception in college too- college gymnasts, rowers, water poloists(?), etc really arent all that marketable. Some college basketball and football players are marketable, and niche areas like a rare baseball player, hockey player, track star, etc too.

My point earlier was that if there are HS kids who are good enough and marketable enough to get paid, then why wouldnt/shouldnt they? If they are bringing in a ton of cash for their school thru games on ESPN, sold out gyms, and clothing sponsorships then is that enough for them to qualify in the same idea and manner as college players? Yes the overall revenue is smaller, but isnt the principle the same?

I know of no high school where what you are describing has taken place on a long term basis. Maybe it has, but usually high schools have a few good years, then it's over, then a few more good years. Tax revenue keeps things going EVERY year. A rare freak athletic may be able to compete well in college or pro ball at age 16 or 17, and they should certainly be able to be paid for that.

Other than that, it is to me better for society in general that everyone at least have a high school education, freak athlete or not.

 

[mstateglfr]

Did those kids pay to build those gyms that are now sold out? Shouldn’t the tax payers who built the gym get that money in the form of paying for the upkeep of the gym and other school expenses? If the players are so marketable, let them rent their own gym or stadium, hire some teammates, and charge their own admission. A guy in Memphis tried this about 5 years ago with a basketball player committed to UK… it didn’t work.

Did any college players pay to build the gyms they play in? Of course they didnt, just like HS players didnt. Not sure what point you are trying to make.
As for playing in other gyms- many high schools do when they are on TV and/or have some transcendent player. LeBron played at U of Akron and elsewhere- games were scheduled at other locations.

College players didnt pay to build the gyms they play in, yet it was effectively declared they should be paid. Apply that to HS too.

 

[mstateglfr]

I know of no high school where what you are describing has taken place on a long term basis. Maybe it has, but usually high schools have a few good years, then it's over, then a few more good years. Tax revenue keeps things going EVERY year. A rare freak athletic may be able to compete well in college or pro ball at age 16 or 17, and they should certainly be able to be paid for that.

Other than that, it is to me better for society in general that everyone at least have a high school education, freak athlete or not.

Correct, it rarely lasts at the HS level. Much like many colleges that have a run of success and then fall back to the average for a lot of years. Davidson, Butler, etc.

 

[johnson86-1]

That's why it doesn't matter if social media bans some conservatives. Let them go start their own twitter and FB and tik tok, right? Capitalism, or really market-based economies, really beats other systems. But not all slogans about capitalism are true.

There are huge network effects to social media. And also, when an alternative to the current quasi monopolists came up, they managed to strangle it pretty effectively.

On the flip side, there aren't really any network effects making it hard to start new minor league sports. The problem is that people generally don't want to pay a lot to watch minor league athletes, unless they are attached to a university. And even if they did, the university compensation is already pretty good, so it'd be hard to offer enough compensation to draw a lot of top tier athletes away from the NCAA.

 

[johnson86-1]

Does anyone really give a **** if high school athletes get paid, or where they decide to go to school? It’s 17ing high school.

I don't care in the abstract where particular high school athletes go or what they get to go to a particular school, but if you have kids competing, it's nice to compete in a league that doesn't allow it and where it isn't rampant to the extent it does occur. It somewhat ruins the fun when most schools are trying to compete with a team made up of their student body, but a few schools in their league are recruiting athletes to play for them and giving them benefits. It's not a huge deal, and the sports are still fun, but they'd be more fun if everybody was on more of a level playing field. And I think people willing to pay tuition (private schools) or rent (public school) to get kids to play for "their" high school are bat **** crazy and I don't think it's some injustice to say that if they want to provide benefits to players, they should play in a different league.

ETA: I recognize that the practice sometimes gets kids out of bad situations into better situations, and I certainly don't have a problem with some high schools wanting to be in leagues where you can offer students benefits. I just think schools should also be allowed to form leagues where the decide they aren't going to allow athletes to receive benefits as part of recruitment.

 

[johnson86-1]

I would argue it’s them being in favor of the constitution.

What part of the constitution deals with antitrust or monopolies or compensation of workers?

 

[jethreauxdawg]

I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m just pointing out the side of the equation that I think is not being discussed. The players benefiting from massive ratings are only able to do so because of the investment made into their programs for the last 100 years. For the most part, people are tuning in to watch the name on the front of the jersey, not the back. There are only a few college football players that people tune in to watch individually. Johnny manziel, Tebow maybe a few more. Today’s players acting like they should be paid big money is like me investing $10,000 in Amazon today and demanding the same shares as the guy who invest $10k in 1995.
Basketball is a different animal. People do tune in to watch individual performances. It’s a different game. But the are also huge beneficiaries of their programs past investments. Yes the Kobe’s and Lebron’s sell out stadiums, but Ive been to a lot of sold out HS games with 1 or 2 guys in there who barely had collegiate careers. I don’t know what the answer is, but I think paying players is going to screw up the whole thing. Top amateur athletes have a pretty sweet thing going and so do the others who contribute to the system but you never hear of. I think this whole thing is being driven by lawyers and short sighted players.

 

[mstateglfr]

What part of the constitution deals with antitrust or monopolies or compensation of workers?

antitrust Sherman 1890 based on Commerce Clause in Article 1 Section 8
monopolies 14th Amendment
compensation of workers Fair Labor Standards Act based on 10th Amendment Interstate Commerce

View attachment 20705

I kid I kid. Those are best guesses based on google. Im sure one of SPS' highly esteemed legal minds can better answer.

 

[mstateglfr]

I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m just pointing out the side of the equation that I think is not being discussed. The players benefiting from massive ratings are only able to do so because of the investment made into their programs for the last 100 years. For the most part, people are tuning in to watch the name on the front of the jersey, not the back. There are only a few college football players that people tune in to watch individually. Johnny manziel, Tebow maybe a few more. Today’s players acting like they should be paid big money is like me investing $10,000 in Amazon today and demanding the same shares as the guy who invest $10k in 1995.
Basketball is a different animal. People do tune in to watch individual performances. It’s a different game. But the are also huge beneficiaries of their programs past investments. Yes the Kobe’s and Lebron’s sell out stadiums, but Ive been to a lot of sold out HS games with 1 or 2 guys in there who barely had collegiate careers. I don’t know what the answer is, but I think paying players is going to screw up the whole thing. Top amateur athletes have a pretty sweet thing going and so do the others who contribute to the system but you never hear of. I think this whole thing is being driven by lawyers and short sighted players.

I agree- the name on the front is important right now in college athletics. Especially true for football where players are masked and less well known(NFL players have this issue with sponsorships).

The name on the front is more important even in basketball, its why Duke can have such a loyal following, but put those same players on the Iowa Wolves(who?) or any random G league team and a whopping 2200 fans will see them play.

 

[Go Budaw]

By "anybody" I mean the P5 and NFL (not sure if I was clear there). I think even the P5 understands that you have to maintain some level of 'amateurism' to keep your loyal fanbases. If it's just another NFL, I don't think it's sustainable. So in that vein, the P5 needs the NFL.

If nothing else, the NFL could just lower their minimum age for a year. It's pretty common sense, not sure why they haven't done it yet.

It doesn’t matter what the Power 5 understands or doesn’t understand about maintaining amateurism to keep fans. You act like schools or the NCAA have any ability to keep it from getting out of hand….they no longer do. The simple fact is that as of the SCOTUS ruling, any attempt to maintain amateurism via compensation limits is officially illegal. The schools themselves can literally pay the players a salary, a scholarship, etc. Boosters can pay players. Corporations can pay players. It’s all going to be happening.

The only thing that might be left in the bag is the scholarship limits for each team in terms of the 85 / 25 rule for football, etc., but even that is now almost pointless based on the above. Some hotshot 5-star can forgo his university scholarship and use some of his 6-figure NIL windfall to pay tuition for 3 years, or some 3* can forgo his and just have a booster step in and pay his tuition.

 

[paindonthurt_]

Um they are student athletes. They don’t have to be.
They have other options.
Get a job and train for 3 years then go to nfl.
Go to Europe. They have a few leagues.
Canadian football league?
Give up football?

Tons of options.

Not interested in being a student athlete? Ok don’t be one.