BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

where to watch

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Basketball

Topic: RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Topic: RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Author

Message

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,285

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/13/2021 1:17:00 PM

longtiimelurker wrote:

I have been waiting for that shoe to drop. As I watched the NCAA commercials during the Tourney I wondered about those 98% of athletes who "are not going professional" that they were touting. Do they get money and how do you decide on how much?

Every single day, at a massive scale, businesses across the United States navigate these exact issues to hire employees. Some of them offer $10 per hour. Others offer $500,000 annually. It depends on the job, the person, and the value created. I have trouble understanding why people hold this up as some insurmountable challenge. If NCAA athletes are found to be employees, they'll end up participating in the labor market like employees do. The university will determine what they can afford to pay, and the potential employee will decide if that's enough for them. If it isn't, they'll go elsewhere.

longtiimelurker wrote:

Is their name, image and likeness going to be worth less?

Yes. Why would the free market care at all about ensuring Jalen Suggs and Mason McMurray earn the same amount of money?

longtiimelurker wrote:

Are photographers at events going to go by the wayside? Do photos and video of athletes morph into NFTs that are owned by individuals and use without the consent of an athlete is going to provide Lawyers with job security till the year 3000 arguing about who owns the NIL of each digital property?

I don't understand the question. There are photographers at NBA games, right?

Literally all the name/likeness thing does is ensure that when a player's name/likeness is used for commercial purposes, said player is compensated. It doesn't give ownership of every photo taken of a player to a player. I mean, if an AP photographer takes a picture of LeBron James, does LeBron James own the photo or does AP? But the moment the AP tries to sell it to Pepsi, you need LeBron James' permission.

Last Edited: 4/13/2021 2:15:19 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Victory
General User

Member Since: 3/10/2012
Post Count: 1,881

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/13/2021 2:08:54 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

longtiimelurker wrote:

I think that this is what people are missing. People claim that a free market would blow up the whole system but maybe the system needs blown up. We know that they system it would become actually does function.

I understand that there are more than 2000 Universities with athletic departments. I understand that most of them can't pay their athletes. I understand that some and afford a scholarship but not much more than that. I think that the problem is that the high paid individuals in athletic departments are always willing to tell us that we need to protect amateurism and the lofty idealism of higher education when it suits their own monetary interest and that, "It is a business," when it doesn't. If you would pick one we could hold you to an ethical standard. It is picking different ethical standards to be held by whenever that particular standard is convenient that is the problem. I don't think that paying athletes a particular set stipend solves the problem. I think that it further blurs the line between the line between business and amateurism and would also make cheating easier.

I think that the right thing to do is for there to be a division above the present D1 where it is a business. There is a free market. Labor and anti-trust laws are enforced. In the end it might only be a handful of schools that can survive in that environment. It wasn't that long ago that most bowls got better ratings than the World Series. Now the playoff takes all of the interest and the same 6 or 7 program get all of the interest from the 5 star recruits.

If you want to make your athletic department part of the educational institution then that's the choice you have made and you will be held to it. Athletes meet the same standards as other students. If you get cited for lack of institutional control then the hammer is dropped on your program to the point where everyone will agree that holding yourself to those standards is the most important thing.

giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,624

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/13/2021 4:07:39 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

Ohio69 wrote:

No, I don’t think they will go down. I think the majority of D1 football schools will keep shelling out the $. Should they go down? Different question than will they. I don’t see P5, AAC, CUSA, Sun Belt backing down. Many univ in states south of Ohio are growing. No need to reduce any salaries or back off on athletics spending in many places. I think the market will keep salaries the same or up.
But, hey, just my speculation.

I'm still not quite following.

If market dynamics dictate coaching salaries, but your initial point -- that there's not enough money in most college athletic programs to pay players -- is true, than which market principle is it that would keep coaching salaries as high as they are currently despite an increase in cost? Presumably coaching salaries are high because they create value, right? If your cost increases, your budget shrinks accordingly. The pie's not getting bigger, you've just got more people to feed.

It seems like the point you may actually be making is that markets play no role in college football coaching salary. Which I think I'm inclined to agree with. There's certainly not much of a rational, market-based explanation for Solich's salary. Maybe even if players are paid, coaches will still be compensated irrationally. I don't know. But I suspect if Ohio University suddenly needs to scare up another 250k in payroll for football players, they're going to wonder why they're paying Solich 700k a year while Sean Lewis at Kent's making $440,000k. Or while Coastal Carolina's coach makes $319k.

You are correct that there is no market driven reason that Solich and even Boals, make what they make.

Ohio69
General User

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

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/13/2021 5:49:05 PM

If you want a winning div 1 football or basketball team in your conference or region or nationally you gotta pay what other schools are willing to pay to have a winning football or basketball team. That’s “the market”. Nothing else matters. Nothing else.

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

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,285

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/13/2021 6:39:00 PM

Ohio69 wrote:

Since nothing else matters, let's compare Boals' pay to some other mid major coaches in similar leagues.

Boals is paind 32% more than Buffalo's coach, 34% more than WMU and EMU's coaches, 38% more than Toledo's, 44% more than NIUs. He's paid 48% more than Gates at CSU and 29% more than the coach at BG. Only Groce at Akron makes more.

On the football side, Solich makes 600k with bonuses. More if he happens to be in a retention bonus year. Toledo, NIU, Central Michigan, Western Michigan and Buffalo pay more than us. Each of those programs has won a MAC championship during Solich's tenure. Solich has not. Solich makes 33% than the coach of the last MAC champion.

So if nothing else matters (nothing else) but the market twould you say we're doing a good job of reading the market in either case?

Last Edited: 4/13/2021 6:39:31 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,624

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/14/2021 2:08:37 PM

I think it’s either we pay dean type money and it truly is an amateur, extra curricular activity or it’s a business model and everyone participates accordingly.

Ohio69
General User

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

Status: Offline

RE: Amateur doesn’t mean for free

Posted: 4/16/2021 5:43:56 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:

[QUOTE=Ohio69]. So if nothing else matters (nothing else) but the market twould you say we're doing a good job of reading the market in either case?

Personally, I don’t have an issue with our current coaches pay or spending on Athletics. And I think too many on campus spend too much time talking about athletics. If there’s an area of the university that I think needs more funding, I’ll talk about that. Over and over. Talking about something/somewhere else is a distraction.

Last Edited: 4/16/2021 5:46:43 PM by Ohio69

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

Showing Replies:	26 - 32 of 32 Posts
Jump to Page:	< Previous 1 \| 2

View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics

There are 341 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

341 Guests
0 Registered Users

There are no other users looking at this page.