Is college football near the end as we know it.

[WreckinGT]

Playing professional football is an extremely rare privilege. Those rare opportunities often require us to make tough choices and jump through hoops we think are illogical. If I was smart enough to want to become a Supreme Court Justice, I'm not required to go to an elite law school, but it's really my only option. It's still a voluntary choice, and in return for that I agree to move to a place without sweet tea and freeze my *** off because they won't let me do it online.

Not a single aspiring Supreme Court justice is currently being prevented from earning what they are worth until they reach the Supreme Court.

 

[GT_05]

Not a single aspiring Supreme Court justice is currently being prevented from earning what they are worth until they reach the Supreme Court.

Don’t attorneys have to pass a Bar exam? I mean, they can have the education but they aren’t worth much until they pass the Bar in every state they plan to practice in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonafideJacket]

Not a single aspiring Supreme Court justice is currently being prevented from earning what they are worth until they reach the Supreme Court.

Sure they are, the ABA prevents law students from working more than 20 hours a week and many schools prohibit it all together. Not to mention the de facto restriction of working their way up as a federal clerk and then lower court federal judge or academic meaning they lose out on potentially millions of dollars available in a career in big law.

ETA: Apparently the ABA has dropped the restriction, but many schools still have one. The ABA dropping it may mean this is more apropo than I originally thought.

 

[gt02]

These examples do make sense, because you are not required to do any of them. In exchange for the opportunity to rent a car, keep my current job, or vote, I agree to restrictions. Yes, I could find another car company that doesn't have the model that I want, or another job that pays less, or simply choose not to vote. Just like football players are not required to participate in college football to pursue a career in the sport - it's just their best opportunity to do so. In exchange for that opportunity, they currently must be willing to forego certain things.

or, you can find another rental car company that does have the model you want at a price that works for you. It's called capitalism.

In short, the answer for why they should not be paid is because they agreed that tuition, room, board, national exposure, etc was an adequate consideration for their services and they were willing to forego profiting on their likeness. That's life. We can change the agreement, but that doesn't mean the current one is illegitimate.

If you are just going to keep saying that the reason is because that is how it is done, you don't have a real reason.

 

[GT_05]

or, you can find another rental car company that does have the model you want at a price that works for you. It's called capitalism.


If you are just going to keep saying that the reason is because that is how it is done, you don't have a real reason.

Actually, that’s the best reason. If you don’t like the rule, change the rule. If the athletes don’t like the rule then they don’t have to play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonafideJacket]

or, you can find another rental car company that does have the model you want at a price that works for you. It's called capitalism.

Just like college football players can take a few years off, earn money however they please (including playing football), and tryout for the NFL. It's called capitalism.

If you are just going to keep saying that the reason is because that is how it is done, you don't have a real reason.

Dude, I don't know what else to tell you. The freedom to contract and the sanctity of abiding by the terms you agreed to? I could go into the basis for the existence of amateur athletics (employment law, workman comp concerns, non-profit status of universities, etc.) but we've already taken this thing way off course. Long and short of it is that society decided that was in everyone's best interest for college students to remain amateur athletes and set up a system whereby everyone was satisfied enough to participate. The winds of change are blowing in a different direction now and society may decide on a different set of rules. That's totally fine and personally I agree with where we are headed (although maybe not how we get there). None of that necessarily means that the original system was illegitimate or discriminatory or any other negative connotation that keeps getting tossed around.

 

[gt02]

Actually, that’s the best reason. If you don’t like the rule, change the rule. If the athletes don’t like the rule then they don’t have to play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

isn't that what we are talking about? changing the rule? And your response is we shouldn't the change rule, because there is a rule.

 

[DaltonJacket]

This particular thing is only about making money on one’s likeness. I see no problem with that and that has very little effect overall on College Football. The Tim Tebow’s and Baker Mayfield’s of the world will make good money off of endorsements and jersey sales, but the average college athlete won’t be affected by this one way or the other and the same can be said about the schools as a whole.

However, if they start paying players(which I’m not inherently against), college football as we know it will cease to exist. There will be a new level of college football that will probably have 20ish teams. We would not be one of them...which might actually be a good thing. We’ll compete with the other 100 schools in a lower division(that will still be televised and beloved because the majority of FBS teams won’t have the money or resources to be in that elite class) and have a more leveled playing field than we do now. It won’t be like FCS nowadays. Teams like Bama, Clemson, UGA and OSU would essentially be a minor league for the NFL. We’d be a second tier that is basically the average NCAA program now.

Where can we sign up?? I'm a-ok with those schools creating their Premier League and us staying with the other 100 or so on a more even playing field.

 

[BonafideJacket]

isn't that what we are talking about? changing the rule? And your response is we shouldn't the change rule, because there is a rule.

I think we may be talking past each other. I never said the rule should not be changed. You asked for a reason student athletes shouldn't be paid and I provided one. (BTW, the reason was not "because there's a rule," it's because the current players agreed to abide by the rule, that's an important distinction). I realize that there is little room for gray areas on the internet, but it is possible for the current system and the proposed change to both be legitimate reasonable alternatives. It doesn't have to be an either/or.

 

[biggtfan]

If you mean they would continue to funnel money under the table - yes, I think that would continue. My point goes more toward the net increase in the number of, and the amount of money players get paid due to this new law. I don't hear stories about non-5-star kids getting cars or cash. There only 50 or so of these players each year. Do you think this law will mean 3- and 4-star players will be endorsing products or selling their likeness (honest question) ?

 

[WreckinGT]

Don’t attorneys have to pass a Bar exam? I mean, they can have the education but they aren’t worth much until they pass the Bar in every state they plan to practice in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of course. They don't have much value until they finish their education and pass the exams they need. Some college football players have a ton of value now and they are prevented from taking advantage of that value for virtually no reason.

 

[GT_05]

isn't that what we are talking about? changing the rule? And your response is we shouldn't the change rule, because there is a rule.

No, the original topic was about California passing a law, not about the NCAA changing a rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonafideJacket]

No, the original topic was about California passing a law, not about the NCAA changing a rule.

In gt02's defense, that's two sides to the same coin. The California law simply prohibits schools from enforcing an NCAA rule.

 

[GT_05]

In gt02's defense, that's two sides to the same coin. The California law simply prohibits schools from enforcing an NCAA rule.

What would prevent the NCAA from keeping these schools from competing in NCAA events? The rule only pertains to them if they’re a member of the NCAA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stech81]

What would prevent the NCAA from keeping these schools from competing in NCAA events? The rule only pertains to them if they’re a member of the NCAA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nothing but boy it would open a can of worms.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

To be fair, they aren’t given anything. They work their tails off

That is true but then what about the various non revenue sports athletes? They "work their tails off" as well.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

Because his daughter didn't.

My daughter was on an academic scholarship. It did not cover the full cost of the private school tuition. Are these "student-athletes" going to remain amateurs or are they going to become semi-professionals? If it is the latter, then I am done with college football. It is bad enough as it is with Alabama and others giving away cars to recruits so let's just get it out in the open.

 

[WreckinGT]

What would prevent the NCAA from keeping these schools from competing in NCAA events? The rule only pertains to them if they’re a member of the NCAA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There will likely be massive lawsuits with the NCAA on one side and a group of pretty powerful Universities on the other side. Im sure the NCAA is going to want to avoid this.

 

[Heisman's Ghost]

So I am still waiting, what is the reason why they should not be paid? And the answer can't just be because it has always been that way. I can tell you several reasons why they should get paid, but I am sure you know all of those.

None of your examples are appropriate here. You don't have to return a rental car with a full tank of gas. You just have to pay for the gas you use, and if you don't like the rate, you can choose another company.

You don't have to show up for work sober. Find a job that lets you show up drunk.

Your voting example doesn't even make sense so not going to address, but the point is that the kids don't have another choice. If they want to have any chance of playing in the league, they need to go to college.

They should be paid if they are willing to drop the pretense they are amateurs. Let them be paid as professionals in training at the factories who can support this. The other schools that wish to maintain what little integrity they have left can continue to provide room, board, books, and tuition to true student-athletes.

 

[Jim Prather]

They should be paid if they are willing to drop the pretense they are amateurs. Let them be paid as professionals in training at the factories who can support this. The other schools that wish to maintain what little integrity they have left can continue to provide room, board, books, and tuition to true student-athletes.

Here's an idea... If they get compensation to play the game, then they should be required to pay for their college education. If they voluntarily choose to forgo compensation, then they will get a scholarship which will cover the cost of their education...