Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Basketball
Topic:  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'

Topic:  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
Author
Message
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,821

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:20:18 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Have you asked yourself why I called you a jackass? Of course not. That would require thought.


Oh...ouch. Brutal. Have you been in your basement practicing how to properly drop a mic? Damn.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:34:48 PM 
Nice attempt to gather the masses. Don't worry, I'm sure the BA world is with you. Your style is obnoxious. You can either admit that or not, I don't care. On top of that, your model has virtually zero chance of being implemented. Do you think that's because the world is just unfair? Or because most people recognize it for what it is: dangerous and a sure-fire way to sink D1 football as we now know it?

Lord, if we implemented this plan, FBS football would fall apart within five years. The Super conferences would run out of teams to compete with. The mid majors would have no money. Ultimately, the players would have no money either because the sport would fail for all but a very small handful of Super teams. The vast majority of college football players would be earning just what they are now: nothing. Many more football players would be out of luck entirely because their team would fold.

The only saving grace? A minor league begins. And as I said, I'm ok with that. But college football should be amateur. And that means leaving corporate cash cows out of it.



Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:37:22 PM 
cc-cat wrote:

Oh...ouch. Brutal. Have you been in your basement practicing how to properly drop a mic? Damn.


I never take it too seriously when people get emotional on a message board or comment section online.
Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,821

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:41:07 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
cc-cat wrote:

Oh...ouch. Brutal. Have you been in your basement practicing how to properly drop a mic? Damn.


I never take it too seriously when people get emotional on a message board or comment section online.


I'm glad you don't - neither do I. which is why I'm making light of your comment.

Oh well. OBJ just killed my fantasy match-up. Time for bed. Have fun. Be good.

Last Edited: 9/16/2019 10:43:06 PM by cc-cat
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:43:34 PM 
And adding a dose of maturity. Thanks for that.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/16/2019 10:56:31 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Nice attempt to gather the masses. Don't worry, I'm sure the BA world is with you. Your style is obnoxious. You can either admit that or not, I don't care. On top of that, your model has virtually zero chance of being implemented. Do you think that's because the world is just unfair? Or because most people recognize it for what it is: dangerous and a sure-fire way to sink D1 football as we now know it?

Lord, if we implemented this plan, FBS football would fall apart within five years. The Super conferences would run out of teams to compete with. The mid majors would have no money. Ultimately, the players would have no money either because the sport would fail for all but a very small handful of Super teams. The vast majority of college football players would be earning just what they are now: nothing. Many more football players would be out of luck entirely because their team would fold.

The only saving grace? A minor league begins. And as I said, I'm ok with that. But college football should be amateur. And that means leaving corporate cash cows out of it.





Im honestly just baffled. Why would this cause so many college football programs to fold?

Everybody opposed to this keeps predicting Armageddon, but whenever I ask why, they refuse to answer and just keep insisting.

Show your work, dude. You're right that the vast majority of players won't see a dime from this, and that a select few will benefit. So why will it bankrupt everybody else?

In practice, the money will continue to be distributed as it currently is, the only difference will be that some more of it will end up with players. What will change so drastically that 120 programs will go bankrupt? The NCAA already has hundreds of corporate sponsors, and each school has local sponsors. You think that revenue just disappears all of the sudden? Why? What even changes about the financial situation of individual schools? They're not paying a single dime more under the California law.


You're making a huge claim. Support it.

Last Edited: 9/16/2019 11:01:11 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 8:31:48 AM 

Can we assume all the pro-California NCAA legislation posters are in favor of all the other legislation California has passed, and will pass, forcing universities and other employers to do certain things?

I must say I do not look forward to the day when Mario Cristobal can walk into Trevor Lawrence's house and say "I'm offering you a scholarship and this is Phil Night and he is offering you a $10 million promotional deal with Nike. $5 million of that will be paid immediately if you sign this offer sheet before we leave the house. The rest will be paid on a per year basis. But remember, even though you will have $5 million right away and be paid millions each year, you still need to take and pass philosophy 101, math 101, sociology 101, and etc. and maintain a full class load the whole time. Also, even though nobody will know who the hell they are, our offensive lineman all have promotional deals worth millions with Nike so you will have the best protection of all NCAA QBs...."

Or, right after Ohio beats Ohio State in basketball, Les Wexner calls up Ben Roderick and says, "Ben, buddy, after you transfer to THE you'll get a $2 million per year promotional deal with Bath and Body Works. Doesn't matter if that makes any sense at all. And, you and your family will be set for life whether you make the NBA or not. That little Ohio U. can't do that for you."







Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 9:05:44 AM 
Ohio69 wrote:
Can we assume all the pro-California NCAA legislation posters are in favor of all the other legislation California has passed, and will pass, forcing universities and other employers to do certain things?




Why would we assume that? Because I support one law, I support them all?

Ohio69 wrote:


Or, right after Ohio beats Ohio State in basketball, Les Wexner calls up Ben Roderick and says, "Ben, buddy, after you transfer to THE you'll get a $2 million per year promotional deal with Bath and Body Works. Doesn't matter if that makes any sense at all. And, you and your family will be set for life whether you make the NBA or not. That little Ohio U. can't do that for you."


The flip side of this, of course, is that you feel that Ben Roderick shouldn't have the right to participate in a market that's willing to take care of his family forever because you like Ohio University more than you like Ohio State.

Morally, I find that basically impossible to rectify. For myself. Your views may vary, but I tend to think that markets are pretty efficient and don't feel comfortable restricting people's rights for the sake of my own entertainment.



Last Edited: 9/17/2019 9:06:31 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,084

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 10:15:23 AM 
I think the best-case example really is the Olympics. I don't believe that the USOC is paying athletes to represent this United States, right? I do believe that there is a monetary bonus for medals, though. However, did Michael Phelps getting millions and millions in endorsements while still an Olympic athlete change the sport considerably? He was definitely making much more than other swimmers, allowing him better trainers and equipment. But, that didn't change my interest in the sport. If Simone Biles gets a greater endorsement deal during her Olympic run, that won't change how I feel about her as an athlete or about her competition.

I think it was Jeremy Bloom, a receiver for Colorado and also a world-class mogul skier (and I think a model as well). He wasn't able to receive his money from skiing endorsements (and maybe modeling as well) because they would void his collegiate eligibility for football. That seems pretty ridiculous to me.

This bill allows us to continue to believe that the NCAA is on the up-and-up, as their hands stay clean. Then, maybe it is going to bring out in the open some of the shadier dealings that have been happening and make them legal. I'm not naive enough to think that Nike has kept their nose and money out of college players in the past. Now, it won't be so secretive. Personally, I'm okay with that. I don't imagine it will ruin the sport.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,504

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 10:32:04 AM 
finnOhio wrote:
I think the best-case example really is the Olympics. I don't believe that the USOC is paying athletes to represent this United States, right? I do believe that there is a monetary bonus for medals, though. However, did Michael Phelps getting millions and millions in endorsements while still an Olympic athlete change the sport considerably? He was definitely making much more than other swimmers, allowing him better trainers and equipment. But, that didn't change my interest in the sport. If Simone Biles gets a greater endorsement deal during her Olympic run, that won't change how I feel about her as an athlete or about her competition.

I think it was Jeremy Bloom, a receiver for Colorado and also a world-class mogul skier (and I think a model as well). He wasn't able to receive his money from skiing endorsements (and maybe modeling as well) because they would void his collegiate eligibility for football. That seems pretty ridiculous to me.

This bill allows us to continue to believe that the NCAA is on the up-and-up, as their hands stay clean. Then, maybe it is going to bring out in the open some of the shadier dealings that have been happening and make them legal. I'm not naive enough to think that Nike has kept their nose and money out of college players in the past. Now, it won't be so secretive. Personally, I'm okay with that. I don't imagine it will ruin the sport.


The problem with the Olympic Model is that it involves individuals,in essence independent contractors,not students participating in a college sport.

I know in sports like wrestling, students take an Olympic Redshirt,and don't usually enroll while they are training.
So for that period of time they aren't a student in the school.

From the articles I've read,its not just the NCAA that would be involved if college athletes get compensation.
You could also,depending on how the Federal Government looks at it,have Title IX implications.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 10:43:54 AM 
rpbobcat wrote:

From the articles I've read,its not just the NCAA that would be involved if college athletes get compensation.
You could also,depending on how the Federal Government looks at it,have Title IX implications.



I think that's why the hybrid model -- which mirrors the Olympics -- is a best case scenario for the NCAA and something they should be supportive of.

Generally speaking, one of the biggest components that goes into determining employment responsibility in most states, is control exerted over the individual. The more control an organization has over the individual -- including control over schedule, time, earning potential, even attire -- the more likely they are to be considered an employee.

Exerting less control by allowing athletes to make money from other parties based on their talents would -- I suspect -- bolster the argument that these are not employees of the Universities.

It seems like a really strong hedge for the NCAA/Universities to support this. I'm really sort of confused by how adamantly opposed they are.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,504

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 10:58:07 AM 
Given the discussion about the "Olympic Model",I was wondering:

1.Does anyone here know how it works with athletes who train at Olympic Training Centers like the one in Colorado works ?

2.Does the USOC cover their training costs ?

If so,how do they decide who gets to train there ?

3.Does the athlete cover some or all of the costs ?

4.Can they be sponsored,including by a company like NIke ?
Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 11:08:24 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Ohio69 wrote:


Or, right after Ohio beats Ohio State in basketball, Les Wexner calls up Ben Roderick and says, "Ben, buddy, after you transfer to THE you'll get a $2 million per year promotional deal with Bath and Body Works. Doesn't matter if that makes any sense at all. And, you and your family will be set for life whether you make the NBA or not. That little Ohio U. can't do that for you."


The flip side of this, of course, is that you feel that Ben Roderick shouldn't have the right to participate in a market that's willing to take care of his family forever because you like Ohio University more than you like Ohio State.

Morally, I find that basically impossible to rectify. For myself. Your views may vary, but I tend to think that markets are pretty efficient and don't feel comfortable restricting people's rights for the sake of my own entertainment.



Good points. I get it. But, I fall back to my point that nothing is stopping Ben Roderick from playing basketball and earning money somewhere else besides the NCAA right now. Nor any high schooler playing hockey, soccer, baseball, basketball, tennis, etc. The NCAA has made its total compensation package known (free tuition and room/board and etc.) and people are free to take it or go be a pro somewhere else like Bryce Harper or Christian Pulisic or Coco Gauff and others do all the time.

In the end I think college athletes will be paid a stipend and get to sign advertising/sponsorship deals. And that will actually do long term damage to non P5 programs (via lost recruiting battles, increase in transfers, decrease in product on the field, and resulting loss of fan/donor interest, etc.) and eventually that will result in less interest in P5 programs as well.

Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,504

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 11:15:58 AM 
Ohio69 wrote:


In the end I think college athletes will be paid a stipend and get to sign advertising/sponsorship deals. And that will actually do long term damage to non P5 programs (via lost recruiting battles, increase in transfers, decrease in product on the field, and resulting loss of fan/donor interest, etc.) and eventually that will result in less interest in P5 programs as well.



This has been discussed before.

I presume the stipend would be in addition to scholarships.

If you do that,then as several people have pointed out,under Title IX you'd have to give an equal stipend to every player on every team.
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,084

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 11:46:19 AM 
Ohio69 wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Ohio69 wrote:


Or, right after Ohio beats Ohio State in basketball, Les Wexner calls up Ben Roderick and says, "Ben, buddy, after you transfer to THE you'll get a $2 million per year promotional deal with Bath and Body Works. Doesn't matter if that makes any sense at all. And, you and your family will be set for life whether you make the NBA or not. That little Ohio U. can't do that for you."


The flip side of this, of course, is that you feel that Ben Roderick shouldn't have the right to participate in a market that's willing to take care of his family forever because you like Ohio University more than you like Ohio State.

Morally, I find that basically impossible to rectify. For myself. Your views may vary, but I tend to think that markets are pretty efficient and don't feel comfortable restricting people's rights for the sake of my own entertainment.



Good points. I get it. But, I fall back to my point that nothing is stopping Ben Roderick from playing basketball and earning money somewhere else besides the NCAA right now. Nor any high schooler playing hockey, soccer, baseball, basketball, tennis, etc. The NCAA has made its total compensation package known (free tuition and room/board and etc.) and people are free to take it or go be a pro somewhere else like Bryce Harper or Christian Pulisic or Coco Gauff and others do all the time.

In the end I think college athletes will be paid a stipend and get to sign advertising/sponsorship deals. And that will actually do long term damage to non P5 programs (via lost recruiting battles, increase in transfers, decrease in product on the field, and resulting loss of fan/donor interest, etc.) and eventually that will result in less interest in P5 programs as well.



Correct in many ways...except football. High school grads do not have the possibility to go pro in the NFL right after high school. They have to wait three years. There are a number of players who likely do not make it to the NFL because they cannot qualify for college academically and after three years, they are unable to make it in the league. Obviously, this law does not affect those individuals, but I think that we need to view football through a different lens than the other sports (once basketball drops the one-and-done policy).
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 12:31:31 PM 
Ohio69 wrote:


Good points. I get it. But, I fall back to my point that nothing is stopping Ben Roderick from playing basketball and earning money somewhere else besides the NCAA right now. Nor any high schooler playing hockey, soccer, baseball, basketball, tennis, etc. The NCAA has made its total compensation package known (free tuition and room/board and etc.) and people are free to take it or go be a pro somewhere else like Bryce Harper or Christian Pulisic or Coco Gauff and others do all the time.



One thing I've always been curious about is how other NCAA sports handle these cases.

Take hockey, for instance. It's not at all uncommon for player who signed contracts with OHL/QMJHL/WHL teams (essentially Canadian minor league teams) to go on to play NCAA hockey. Those are professional leagues where players are paid, albeit it small amounts. In addition, the NHL can draft college players and own their rights without it impacting their eligibility. Those players have agents who represent them during that process.

Similar exceptions are made for NCAA baseball players.

Why is that those same rights don't extend to NCAA basketball and football players? Anybody know?

I mean, if I were a pessimist, it'd be hard not to conclude that the NCAA is most protective of amateur status in the sports where they happen to make the most money.

Back to Top
  
cc-cat
General User

Member Since: 4/5/2006
Location: matthews, NC
Post Count: 3,821

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 12:31:32 PM 
rpbobcat wrote:
Given the discussion about the "Olympic Model",I was wondering:

1.Does anyone here know how it works with athletes who train at Olympic Training Centers like the one in Colorado works ?

2.Does the USOC cover their training costs ?

If so,how do they decide who gets to train there ?

3.Does the athlete cover some or all of the costs ?

4.Can they be sponsored,including by a company like NIke ?




In the past I've promoted the US Canoe and Kayak team - helping them find sponsors and funding. The way it worked in the past (been 12 years now). They were based in Charlotte because we built the Outdoor Center here as part of their training. They would work out here, in the mountains and in Ga on Lake Lanier.

The USOC allocates funds to each of the governing bodies (track, gymnastics, USACK, etc.) based on how that team did in the last Olympics and Worlds. The more medals your organization wins, the more money you get - obviously more for golds. So naturally the major, and larger sports rule the cash register.

The organizations pick who gets to train and where. based on past results and potential. For USACK the facility is provided, but the athletes cover most costs for living (one Olympian was living in is car in the front yard of his teammate who was recently married - had access to the bathroom and kitchen).

Additional funds can be provided by sponsors - but money directed to the organization is used as the organization sees fit. In one case, Cadillac provided a new Escalade to each governing body - for transportation or to sell / raffle off for funding. The USACK Director kept it for himself (there are assholes everywhere - he was later replaced). Individual athletes CAN be sponsored by corporations or garner other funding (Lowe's (a NC company) stepped forward and paid a couple of the better kayakers).

This works for every sport. Michael Phelps had access to US Swim, but supplemented that with his own private training - turning pro in swimming with an endorsement from Speedo when he was still in high school. His money to use as he saw fit. It made him ineligible at Michigan for swimming, though he he may (MAY) have been able to compete in water polo as colleges now allow athletes to be pro (in his case accept money for endorsement in a sport) in one sport and still compete as amateurs in other sports.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,504

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/17/2019 3:22:15 PM 
Thanks for the information.
Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 8:17:21 AM 
So do people think non-P5 athletic programs like Ohio/MAC would survive at D1 level with stipends to players, more open transfer rules, and endorsement $ for players? As you can tell I am filled with doubt.

Last Edited: 9/18/2019 8:17:36 AM by Ohio69

Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 9:22:21 AM 
Ohio69 wrote:
So do people think non-P5 athletic programs like Ohio/MAC would survive at D1 level with stipends to players, more open transfer rules, and endorsement $ for players? As you can tell I am filled with doubt.



As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,504

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 9:29:14 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.


Endorsement deals can get tricky.

If you look at cc-cat's post on the Olympics,Micheal Phelps got an endorsement deal from Speedo.
That made him a "professional",so he couldn't swim for Michigan.

There are a lot of potential landmines with any compensation model.
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,084

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 10:17:19 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
Ohio69 wrote:
So do people think non-P5 athletic programs like Ohio/MAC would survive at D1 level with stipends to players, more open transfer rules, and endorsement $ for players? As you can tell I am filled with doubt.



As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.


Devil's advocate possibility with the endorsements. Could it help P5 schools get the tweener recruits? Imagine you're somewhat of a stud, but not top of the top. Maybe you're willing to go to a school where you are likely to be big fish in a small pond and hopefully have your name make a little dent. This would probably work in a P5 school near a semi-big city (Temple, Buffalo, Toledo, NIU, Boise, UNLV). Nathan Rourke possibly could get some small-town endorsements at OHIO, whereas if he'd landed at a bigger school, he might not be making the same splash. No P5 school was ever going to compete with Clemson on Trevor Lawrence, but maybe we could compete with some of the schools for lower 4 stars or upper 3 stars.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 11:14:18 AM 
rpbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.


Endorsement deals can get tricky.

If you look at cc-cat's post on the Olympics,Micheal Phelps got an endorsement deal from Speedo.
That made him a "professional",so he couldn't swim for Michigan.

There are a lot of potential landmines with any compensation model.



Well, it made him a professional by the NCAAs standards. The NCAA can just change the standard.

I mean, it's pretty much arbitrary that both the NCAA and Olympics are for amateur athletes and Phelps was eligible for one but not the other, right?

As I mentioned earlier, from a labor law standpoint the NCAA is much better off if these athletes make income elsewhere. The less control they exert over them the better, if the objective is to ensure they're never classified as employees.

Last Edited: 9/18/2019 11:23:01 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,084

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 11:28:54 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
rpbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.


Endorsement deals can get tricky.

If you look at cc-cat's post on the Olympics,Micheal Phelps got an endorsement deal from Speedo.
That made him a "professional",so he couldn't swim for Michigan.

There are a lot of potential landmines with any compensation model.



Well, it made him a professional by the NCAAs standards. The NCAA can just change the standard.

I mean, it's pretty much arbitrary that both the NCAA and Olympics are for amateur athletes and Phelps was eligible for one but not the other, right?

As I mentioned earlier, from a labor law standpoint the NCAA is much better off if these athletes make income elsewhere. The less control they exert over them the better, if the objective is to ensure they're never classified as employees.


I wouldn't say that the Olympics are for amateur athletes any more. I think that the NBA with the Dream Team, the NHL, PGA golfers, and WTA players have assured that amateurism and Olympics are no longer synonymous.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,286

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: USA Today: NCAA sends California governor letter calling name, likeness bill 'unconstitutional'
   Posted: 9/18/2019 11:39:19 AM 
finnOhio wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
rpbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


As far as stipends go, I'm not quite sure. It really depends on the size of the stipends. Personally, I'd like to try and keep the 'compensation' outside of the universities. Universities would likely agree.

But if players are just open to receiving endorsement deals, I'm not sure how this changes the economics much. The best teams will still get the best players. We're not really competitive with them as is. So not sure really how much it impacts us at all, beyond putting a dent in the perception that we're on the same level as Duke and Clemson.


Endorsement deals can get tricky.

If you look at cc-cat's post on the Olympics,Micheal Phelps got an endorsement deal from Speedo.
That made him a "professional",so he couldn't swim for Michigan.

There are a lot of potential landmines with any compensation model.



Well, it made him a professional by the NCAAs standards. The NCAA can just change the standard.

I mean, it's pretty much arbitrary that both the NCAA and Olympics are for amateur athletes and Phelps was eligible for one but not the other, right?

As I mentioned earlier, from a labor law standpoint the NCAA is much better off if these athletes make income elsewhere. The less control they exert over them the better, if the objective is to ensure they're never classified as employees.


I wouldn't say that the Olympics are for amateur athletes any more. I think that the NBA with the Dream Team, the NHL, PGA golfers, and WTA players have assured that amateurism and Olympics are no longer synonymous.


That's fair and definitely accurate. Worth noting though that the Olympics made that shift because the landscape of global athletics changed so drastically that insisting on strict amateurism made it such that the best athletes in the world were ineligible.

The NCAA could probably learn something from that.

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  101 - 125  of 252 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 162 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
161 Guests
1 Registered User:
 colobobcat66
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties