The Supreme Court rules.....

[Xenomorph]

I think you're wrong but neither of us will be proven right for a few years. I believe this is a seismic shift in how AD's operate. Ultimately, I see it as the catalyst for the P5 breaking away from the NCAA.

However, I don't think anyone can question that this ruling and the ones to follow will have an untold number of consequences (both good and not so good) that are totally unpredictable at this point.

Think of it like the iPhone. Even Apple never dreamed back in 2007 the different ways people would use it. This is about to reshape collegiate athletics.

 

[johnson86-1]

Shocked at the identity of posters that want to continue making people work for free in this thread******

it was 9-0. it's not a liberal/conservative thing. Read what Gorsuch said....

You managed to pack a lot of wrong into a short sentence.

College athletes are paid. They are mostly paid in kind, but also often get some cash compensation. All in all, they seem to be paid competitively with other minor league athletes. The ones that seem to be paid more are ones that are paid because of the option value of having rights to the player if/when they do make it to the majors.

Even if they weren't paid, every college athlete that is good enough can go pro in their sport of choice rather than play in college, with the exception of football players. So nobody is forcing the vast majority of athletes to do anything. For the few athletes that play football and are good enough that they could make an NFL team as a freshman, sophomore, or junior, it's the NFL that locks them out. I'm not entirely clear why that's not an antitrust violation. I get that the rules are different when unions are involved, but I'm not clear on how a union an athlete is not a part of can make it legal for employers to agree to not hire certain players. Not that the law has to make sense, but that doesn't make sense.

ETA: I'm not opposed to really good players getting paid more; I just think it should be permissible for universities to capture more of the value their brand creates. I think it'd be good to have more flexibilitiy to pay the best players if it meant less competing in the facilities arms race.

 

[ronpolk]

Lots of good posts in the thread both for and against the players getting money.

I tend to find myself on the side of being perfectly fine with the players getting a bigger slice of the pie, especially when you look at the revenue the NCAA pulls in. But I can understand the other side of the equation too.

What I can’t understand is why people would say they won’t watch college sports anymore if players are getting paid.

 

[johnson86-1]

Lots of good posts in the thread both for and against the players getting money.

I tend to find myself on the side of being perfectly fine with the players getting a bigger slice of the pie, especially when you look at the revenue the NCAA pulls in. But I can understand the other side of the equation too.

What I can’t understand is why people would say they won’t watch college sports anymore if players are getting paid.

I won't be bothered if players get paid more than they are now, but if they are able to capture pretty much all of the value, then I will be out. Right now, the value created by college sports is spread around pretty decently. Certainly more goes to coaching compensation and administrative bloat than I'd prefer, but a lot goes to athletes in non-revenue sports, a good bit goes to athletes in revenue sports, a good bit goes to facilities which are at least enjoyed by the athletes and are assets to the school eventually (although maybe in practice once they go to athletic department use they never benefit the university otherwise). If it gets to where everything else is starved just to maximize pay to the revenue sport athletes, I'll probably stop supporting it. Just too much money being sucked away from the school itself to feel good about supporting it.

 

[SheltonChoked]

Have they?

And you must not know any athletes if you think" the only ones complaining are football players".

Bruce has posted on here about not getting to make money.

Gosuch said that they were treated as free labor, and that situation exists nowhere else in the US. And that "On no account, the court found, could such education related benefits be “confused with a professional athlete’ssalary.”"

Kavanaugh was even more blunt "The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America. All of therestaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’wages on the theory that “customers prefer” to eat food fromlow-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a “loveof the law.” Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ incomein order to create a “purer” form of helping the sick. Newsorganizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reportersto preserve a “tradition” of public-minded journalism.Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to cameracrews to kindle a “spirit of amateurism” in Hollywood.Price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor. And price-fixinglabor is ordinarily a textbook antitrust problem because itextinguishes the free market in which individuals can otherwise obtain fair compensation for their work."

Again, not surprised at all you are arguing agist worker rights vs the company and calling it capitalism...

 

[JungRebel]

Let the market decide, it's pretty simple if we want to go that route. You can either get a scholarship or sign a contract but not both. I say that perhaps make accounting easier and separate the new distinction clearly, but I suppose having a scholarship now or later could be offered contractually. MLB IIRC often will tack on paying for college if baseball doesnt work out for a high school player.

 

[SheltonChoked]

What is you explanation for people not watching MSU women's basketball before Vic? Or Men's basketball before Williams? Or MSU football under Croom?

If it's not the athletes, but the university, attendance wouldn't vary based on how good the teams are....

But it seems better athletes make better teams, and get more money...

Lot's on here wanting to close the barn door after the horses are all long gone....

 

[SheltonChoked]

You managed to pack a lot of wrong into a short sentence.

College athletes are paid. They are mostly paid in kind, but also often get some cash compensation. All in all, they seem to be paid competitively with other minor league athletes. The ones that seem to be paid more are ones that are paid because of the option value of having rights to the player if/when they do make it to the majors.

Even if they weren't paid, every college athlete that is good enough can go pro in their sport of choice rather than play in college, with the exception of football players. So nobody is forcing the vast majority of athletes to do anything. For the few athletes that play football and are good enough that they could make an NFL team as a freshman, sophomore, or junior, it's the NFL that locks them out. I'm not entirely clear why that's not an antitrust violation. I get that the rules are different when unions are involved, but I'm not clear on how a union an athlete is not a part of can make it legal for employers to agree to not hire certain players. Not that the law has to make sense, but that doesn't make sense.

ETA: I'm not opposed to really good players getting paid more; I just think it should be permissible for universities to capture more of the value their brand creates. I think it'd be good to have more flexibilitiy to pay the best players if it meant less competing in the facilities arms race.

You manage to pack even more ignorance into your BS.

Per Kavanagh and Gorsuch, College athletes are not paid. Period. You keep saying "they seem to be paid competitively with other minor league athletes." which was directly addressed by both opinions today as wrong. Again, not my words.

Your third paragraph is completely wrong as well per SCOTUS.

as is your ETA... per Scotus


Seems like you are spouting off about what you wanted to be said instead of reading what was said...

Try reading.

 

[SheltonChoked]

So what is your dollar value before you quit?

 

[SheltonChoked]

Nobody is “making” anyone work anywhere, and they aren’t working for “free” unless you are assigning zero value to a tax free tuition scholarship, dorm/housing allowance, books, and meal plans.

SCOTUS said that the academic benefits were not equivalent to a salary.

Gosuch said that they were treated as free labor, and that situation exists nowhere else in the US. And that

"On no account, the court found, could such education related benefits be “confused with a professional athlete’s salary.”"

Kavanaugh was even more blunt

"The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America. All of therestaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’wages on the theory that “customers prefer” to eat food fromlow-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a “loveof the law.” Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ incomein order to create a “purer” form of helping the sick. Newsorganizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reportersto preserve a “tradition” of public-minded journalism.Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to cameracrews to kindle a “spirit of amateurism” in Hollywood.Price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor. And price-fixinglabor is ordinarily a textbook antitrust problem because itextinguishes the free market in which individuals can otherwise obtain fair compensation for their work."

 

[johnson86-1]

Have they?

And you must not know any athletes if you think" the only ones complaining are football players".

Did anyone say the only ones complaining are football players? I just pointed out that football players are the only ones effectively locked out of professional sports. Everybody else that wants to get paid what they think their market value can just go do that. Football players don't really have a viable alternative until they are draft eligible. Baseball players can sort of complain. They can go straight to the minors, but if they go to college because they don't think they can get a spot on a minor league team, they're locked up for three years at that point (assuming they are typical age; two years if they are older for their grade).

Bruce has posted on here about not getting to make money.

Gosuch said that they were treated as free labor, and that situation exists nowhere else in the US. And that "On no account, the court found, could such education related benefits be “confused with a professional athlete’ssalary.”"

It's not confused with the professional athlete's salary. It's just pointing out that it's compensation. And again, for everybody but football players, if that compensation isn't enough, there are other leagues they can go play for.

Kavanaugh was even more blunt "The NCAA’s business model would be flatly illegal in almost any other industry in America. All of therestaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’wages on the theory that “customers prefer” to eat food fromlow-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a “loveof the law.” Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ incomein order to create a “purer” form of helping the sick. Newsorganizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reportersto preserve a “tradition” of public-minded journalism.Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to cameracrews to kindle a “spirit of amateurism” in Hollywood.Price-fixing labor is price-fixing labor. And price-fixinglabor is ordinarily a textbook antitrust problem because itextinguishes the free market in which individuals can otherwise obtain fair compensation for their work."

None of those are sports leagues. Sports leagues pretty much by definition can have some coordination because it's what makes the leagues work. The NCAA's "problem" is that its membership institutions have created brand loyalty that makes two of its minor league sports very profitable, despite not having the highest level of competition, that essentially involves an arms race that still will result in the athletes capturing the value created by the members if they don't coordinate among themselves. There may not be a legal way under current law for them to avoid that but it's because sports leagues are different than other organizations.

Again, not surprised at all you are arguing against worker rights vs the company and calling it capitalism...

Well, I would agree that it's not exactly capitalism. But if it's not clear, I would support making it illegal for the NFL to just simply ban workers from being eligible to play in the NFL just based on age. If that's legal, Congress should pass a law to make it illegal. Then it would be reasonable for leagues to compete with each other for players and should be prohibited from colluding with each other.

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

I don’t think it’s so much a direct effect. It’s not a “Well, if they are being paid, I’m not watching.” For me, the fear is that the vast effects of this new college sports model might mean I lose total interest. I don’t think the NCAA or the schools have a handle on how to function in this new system. Look at Major League Baseball and the gap between the Yankees and the Royals. That’s kind of the gap that exists now in college sports. But this decision has the potential to SIGNIFICANTLY widen such a gap. Does this create a system where Alabama football is the Yankees and we are now the Double A team by comparison? What if this cascades to baseball as well and Alabama decides they want to buy some players to win a baseball national championship or 3 with their football riches? Programs and fans for some schools will quickly lose interest and turn it off if they feel like they aren’t competitive and never will be competitive. And I’m not saying this will happen. But you’d be foolish also to say that it can’t, not having any concept of how the payouts and rules will be structured, if there even are any rules.

What I can’t understand is why people would say they won’t watch college sports anymore if players are getting paid.

 

[turkish]

You have to incentivize the donor base to stream cash to players while at the same time maintaining giving levels to the Bulldog Club.

Better get creative quick.. cause other people are going to.

I’ll say they need creativity! Ironically, I’m less likely to give money to athletics under this new model. Much less, in fact.

This will be an absolute windfall … for accountants.

 

[ronpolk]

I don’t think it’s so much a direct effect. It’s not a “Well, if they are being paid, I’m not watching.” For me, the fear is that the vast effects of this new college sports model might mean I lose total interest. I don’t think the NCAA or the schools have a handle on how to function in this new system. Look at Major League Baseball and the gap between the Yankees and the Royals. That’s kind of the gap that exists now in college sports. But this decision has the potential to SIGNIFICANTLY widen such a gap. Does this create a system where Alabama football is the Yankees and we are now the Double A team by comparison? What if this cascades to baseball as well and Alabama decides they want to buy some players to win a baseball national championship or 3 with their football riches? Programs and fans for some schools will quickly lose interest and turn it off if they feel like they aren’t competitive and never will be competitive. And I’m not saying this will happen. But you’d be foolish also to say that it can’t, not having any concept of how the payouts and rules will be structured, if there even are any rules.

What it sounds like you’re really worried about is Mississippi State becoming what southern miss has become? 15 years ago southern would have played competitive games with state and ole miss in football and now it’s a certain win against a team like southern.

If that is the case, doesn’t that shot holes in your previous post that says the schools make the sport popular not the players? If we become irrelevant because of these changes are you not going to still support the players, even if they aren’t as good?

I have no idea what these changes mean. But I do believe they will generally be positive for state. We are lucky to be in the power 5 and at that maybe the most influential conference in the power 5.

 

[T-TownDawgg]

I’ll tell you why is that- because
1.VERY few student athletes receive 200k to play football or basketball and
2. A degree will earn them 200k many times over in their career, since 99.97% of them will have to actually work for a living.

 

[Bill Shankly]

Shocked at the identity of posters that want to continue making people work for free in this thread******

it was 9-0. it's not a liberal/conservative thing. Read what Gorsuch said....

They weren't working for free. Put a kid through college recently? They are being paid and being paid well.

 

[Bill Shankly]

Lots of good posts in the thread both for and against the players getting money.

I tend to find myself on the side of being perfectly fine with the players getting a bigger slice of the pie, especially when you look at the revenue the NCAA pulls in. But I can understand the other side of the equation too.

What I can’t understand is why people would say they won’t watch college sports anymore if players are getting paid.

Because it becomes a pro sport. Might as well watch the real thing then.

 

[Bill Shankly]

You don't think being able to pay 35 baseball scholarships will help MSU?

It depends on who else does and how much they pay. I could easily see it destroying MSU baseball rather than helping it.

 

[Bulldog from Birth]

The schools drive the value SIGNIFICANTLY more than the players is my argument. But you need at least some level of competent skill among the players…..you can’t just trot out the differential equations class in jerseys. And you also need hope. If you have no hope to compete against your peers now or ever, interest will quickly die.

My argument is simply if you brought up a the Division 2 players to the SEC schools, and moved all the SEC players to an NFL minor league affiliate in Tupelo, the universities would continue to draw massive crowds. And the NFL minor leagues would not.

 

[QuaoarsKing]

They weren't working for free. Put a kid through college recently? They are being paid and being paid well.

Benefits aren't salary though, especially benefits that some aren't going to be able to capitalize on. If your boss told you he/she would be doubling your salary, but the extra would be paid exclusively in non-transferable Taco Bell gift cards, would consider that to really be a raise?

 

[ronpolk]

The schools drive the value SIGNIFICANTLY more than the players is my argument. But you need at least some level of competent skill among the players…..you can’t just trot out the differential equations class in jerseys. And you also need hope. If you have no hope to compete against your peers now or ever, interest will quickly die.

My argument is simply if you brought up a the Division 2 players to the SEC schools, and moved all the SEC players to an NFL minor league affiliate in Tupelo, the universities would continue to draw massive crowds. And the NFL minor leagues would not.

I understand what you’re saying I just don’t think it’s an apples to apples comparison. People that enjoy pro sports don’t watch minors because there is a higher level of competition to watch. People that enjoy college sports don’t watch cusa because the power 5 is there.

I’m not saying the schools don’t matter, because they do. But if talent didn’t matter just as much why don’t schools like USF or FIU that have enormous enrollment not have fan support. You think those students or alumni don’t want a football team to be proud of? Yet a much smaller and way more exclusive school like Miami has huge fan support, especially when Miami has a ton of NFL talent.

 

[SheltonChoked]

And I can see it expanding the game. Allowing access to players that cannot afford to pay their own way to play college baseball.

 

[karlchilders.sixpack]

As a life long MSU fan

I have no plans to support or follow a Minor league program, at any school.

I'm interested to see what will happen to booster donations over the next 3/5 years.

 

[SheltonChoked]

This ******* did..

Basically the only players that can complain are football players, .

And you keep arguing with Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. The argument is "that's the point". The NCAA limits the availability for them to earn money. That there are other jobs available hurt the ncaa's case.

You keep making up **** and saying "this is right" when there is a ruling that disagrees with almost everything you are saying.

Which you would know if you read even a summary of either opinion.

 

[SheltonChoked]

They are being paid and being paid well.

Not according to SCOTUS.

 

[EagleDawg97]

If your boss said I will pay your housing cost (room) and all of your normal meal cost (board), and give you some spending money ($850) a month, I would most certainly consider that pay. Are you honestly saying there is no value is a place to live, your food, and monthly spending money?

 

[ronpolk]

If your boss said I will pay your housing cost (room) and all of your normal meal cost (board), and give you some spending money ($850) a month, I would most certainly consider that pay. Are you honestly saying there is no value is a place to live, your food, and monthly spending money?

I don’t think many people are saying there is no value in what the players currently get. But in your hypothetical situation above, wouldn’t you rather just your employer pay you what your worth and let you decide how to spend it? Meaning what type of house you’d like and what type of food you’d want.

 

[EagleDawg97]

Possibly, but I would certainly not be upset if he wanted to play my mortgage and grocery bills. That is a massive financial benefit anyway you look at it.

 

[johnson86-1]

I understand what you’re saying I just don’t think it’s an apples to apples comparison. People that enjoy pro sports don’t watch minors because there is a higher level of competition to watch. People that enjoy college sports don’t watch cusa because the power 5 is there.

I’m not saying the schools don’t matter, because they do. But if talent didn’t matter just as much why don’t schools like USF or FIU that have enormous enrollment not have fan support. You think those students or alumni don’t want a football team to be proud of? Yet a much smaller and way more exclusive school like Miami has huge fan support, especially when Miami has a ton of NFL talent.

The relevant talent between schools matters a lot in how fan base and money flows to each school. But it matters less in driving attention to the sport to begin with. It certainly matters some, but I think it’s a relatively minor role. How much has interest in college basketball dropped as talented players spend less and less time in college? I think it probably would be more popular if it had more talented players and the play was better because of continuity, but it’s managed pretty well as it is.

 

[garddog]

Easiest way to fix this is no more scholarships. 1099's for all athletes and they spend it how they want. No free education, no free food, no free housing. Salary cap like the pros so it can't get stupid. Contract is for 4 years, if they hit the portal, then they have broken their contract, penalties to be assesed.

 

[ezsoil]

Easiest way to fix this is no more scholarships. 1099's for all athletes and they spend it how they want. No free education, no free food, no free housing. Salary cap like the pros so it can't get stupid. Contract is for 4 years, if they hit the portal, then they have broken their contract, penalties to be assesed.

i like it ...if they want to be big boys ...they should have all of the consequences of being responsible....what is sad is the handlers will still ruin these kids ....

 

[TrueMaroonGrind]

Justice Kavanaugh didn’t hold back in his concurrence. It’s over for the ncaa when the payment restrictions are challenged in the next suit.

If the NCAA wanted to keep it the way it was then they would have not commercialized everything or would have shared some of the profits with the students. They made their bed and now they have to lay in it.

 

[TrueMaroonGrind]

If your boss said I will pay your housing cost (room) and all of your normal meal cost (board), and give you some spending money ($850) a month, I would most certainly consider that pay. Are you honestly saying there is no value is a place to live, your food, and monthly spending money?

No there is value, but it isn’t the same as getting paid money. There used to be mining towns that would pay their workers in proprietary currency. That currency would only work at their company store or company housing. That had value but locked workers into this system that gave them very little freedom. This is no longer legal and neither should the NCAA model.

Either stop raking money in hand over fist and make this truly an amateur sport or give the players some money.

It will change the game for sure. Coaches will hopefully be paid less. Facilities unfortunately may not be as nice. Here’s to hoping State will somehow come out on top.

 

[mstateglfr]

17ing activist judges!!***

 

[WilCoDawg]

Too sensible. Will never happen. There’s no warm and fuzzies in this option so public opinion woke screamers would nix it.

 

[WilCoDawg]

All the money would be blown before they even step on campus.

 

[mstateglfr]

Right there with you, but it should all be 1099 income. Don't penalize the university by making it W2. Make them pay 100% of all the taxes.

Yeah, cuz there is nothing sketch about a university crushing it in profits due to tv rights contracts and merchandising, and then claiming they should be exempt from paying taxes since they are non-profit.
That classification is such a joke in education.

 

[Bill Shankly]

Benefits aren't salary though, especially benefits that some aren't going to be able to capitalize on. If your boss told you he/she would be doubling your salary, but the extra would be paid exclusively in non-transferable Taco Bell gift cards, would consider that to really be a raise?

If they aren't there to benefit from a free education then they shouldn't be there to begin with.....and THAT is the real problem in a nutshell.

 

[Bill Shankly]

And I can see it expanding the game. Allowing access to players that cannot afford to pay their own way to play college baseball.

That wasn't my point. I care about how this will affect MSU. It's going to destroy our athletic program I think. I think it will eventually substantially reduce overall access. The playing field will be so uneven that a lot of schools will go the Ivy League route when they see they have absolutely no chance to ever compete. The difference between then and now is that it will be there in plain black and white. There won't be room for wishful thinking. It's going to be a casino at about 15 to 30 schools ( AND NOTICE I SAID SCHOOLS, NOT PROGRAMS) depending on what the going rate for players settles at. The rest will slowly cut back to nearly nothing.

 

[Bill Shankly]

Easiest way to fix this is no more scholarships. 1099's for all athletes and they spend it how they want. No free education, no free food, no free housing. Salary cap like the pros so it can't get stupid. Contract is for 4 years, if they hit the portal, then they have broken their contract, penalties to be assesed.

Salary caps won't stand. That is absolutely implicit in that ruling.