NIL in CBB

leatherneckjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,068
Location
Atlanta, GA
I didn’t even read your whole post because even after “quoting me” you completely misread the quote. So your whole post is based on a straw argument.

You need to get over the idea that I was offering a blanket criticism of all forms of capitalism. If you do that then we can have a conversation. Till then you will just be stuck in your own head.

I think capitalism, when it is working, offers the best of all possible worlds. I am a very happy capitalist.

But I also believe it can get skewed by unsavory influences and become just as oppressive for the little guy as any system. If you disagree then we will just have to agree to disagree.

Now, with regard to sports, it seems you are happy with the current arrangement. More power to you. I do not think the current arrangement offers the best of all possible worlds. Again, we can agree to disagree.
I have never said I am happy with the current arrangement. In fact, quite the opposite.

Again, I was arguing against your assertion that Marx was right that capitalism leads to lack of production because there are a few winners and many losers. There is only one interpretation of that assertion and suggesting you meant something else is nonsensical. I was also not merely defending your attack on capitalism. Rather, I was countering your inane suggestion that Marx was right about it and the implication that athletes will not be productive if there is pay disparity. There are critiques of capitalism to be made, and feel free to make them. I am not here to make absolute arguments that capitalism is perfect or without fault. But if you are going to critique capitalism, as least pick something that is not demonstrably false.

Finally, what you are describing with "unsavory influences" and "oppression of the little guy" is not capitalism. When someone tips the scales (government or other entity) in one company's favor or monopolies exist, that is not capitalism. When labor has no options and is compelled rather than voluntary, that is not capitalism Capitalism is the free exchange of goods, services, capital and labor from all parties involved where each party may seek to maximize their own benefit without interference from other outside influences.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,692
I have never said I am happy with the current arrangement. In fact, quite the opposite.

Again, I was arguing against your assertion that Marx was right that capitalism leads to lack of production because there are a few winners and many losers. There is only one interpretation of that assertion and suggesting you meant something else is nonsensical. I was also not merely defending your attack on capitalism. Rather, I was countering your inane suggestion that Marx was right about it and the implication that athletes will not be productive if there is pay disparity. There are critiques of capitalism to be made, and feel free to make them. I am not here to make absolute arguments that capitalism is perfect or without fault. But if you are going to critique capitalism, as least pick something that is not demonstrably false.

Finally, what you are describing with "unsavory influences" and "oppression of the little guy" is not capitalism. When someone tips the scales (government or other entity) in one company's favor or monopolies exist, that is not capitalism. When labor has no options and is compelled rather than voluntary, that is not capitalism Capitalism is the free exchange of goods, services, capital and labor from all parties involved where each party may seek to maximize their own benefit without interference from other outside influences.
Again, hard to wade through your long response because you continue to put words in my mouth. Marx was right about what can happen in capitalism. I was clear when I said “one thing” he was right about. If things get out of balance then, indeed, things can go awry. You say if that happens it’s no longer capitalism. That’s a distinction without a difference.

I don’t see the need to continue this because you are clearly triggered in some way by Marx that makes you defensive about capitalism, even when it goes wrong.

I’ll repeat my sentiment one more time. I like capitalism when it works. When it works it’s the best system in the world. But it can also go wrong and create an unnecessarily large number of losers, which is what I think is currently happening in the NCAA.

It’s ok for you to disagree with this. Really, it is. But don’t try to take a sentence out of context and base all your arguments around a straw man.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,189
I guess instead of hinting at things like Marx's ideas about alienated labor you should've just referred to what we call it today when it happens to white-collar professionals making hundreds of thousands a year but not feeling connected to the overall success or profits of the busines: burnout. I guess that's the new PC term :D
 

eetech

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
195
So much to unpack and so many unknown consequences, but the “good intentions” of revenue sharing are going to be another boon to big football programs. If a kid in a non-revenue sport is considering a couple of schools, the possibility of that school’s football success now becomes a bigger factor.... it’s a potential bonus pool

Question: if these players become salaried employees of the school, is that salary in addition to or in lieu of scholarship?

I’m not thinking this will solve as many issues as it creates... I’m also not sure it’s going to work out for the best interest of the student athletes.

The entire campus is filled with students on scholarship who are also employees of the college. Ever walked into the library, or into the IT department, or had a TA, or an RA in college? They are also welcome to start their own businesses, sell their NILs, work in ads, be influencers, etc. and NO ONE bats an eyelid. Heck, they're celebrated as entrepreneurs.

The only ridiculous part in this entire situation is how "Student Athletes" somehow were deprived of basic rights that everyone else has. Is there a single other scholarship recipient on campus that has to forsake the ability to work, or receive gifts from family and friends, etc. to maintain their scholarship?

The biggest irony, of course, are the people who keep whinging upon about freedom are the ones that are most defensive about this highly illegal, highly anti-capitalist, and highly unfreedomlike suppression of the individual's rights to compete in the market.
 

CEB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,464
The entire campus is filled with students on scholarship who are also employees of the college. Ever walked into the library, or into the IT department, or had a TA, or an RA in college? They are also welcome to start their own businesses, sell their NILs, work in ads, be influencers, etc. and NO ONE bats an eyelid. Heck, they're celebrated as entrepreneurs.

The only ridiculous part in this entire situation is how "Student Athletes" somehow were deprived of basic rights that everyone else has. Is there a single other scholarship recipient on campus that has to forsake the ability to work, or receive gifts from family and friends, etc. to maintain their scholarship?

The biggest irony, of course, are the people who keep whinging upon about freedom are the ones that are most defensive about this highly illegal, highly anti-capitalist, and highly unfreedomlike suppression of the individual's rights to compete in the market.
You’re not going to get a disagreement from me on this. The NCAA standard of “0” was a lazy unattainable standard but it was set because they had no idea how to quantify appropriate levels of compensation. Probably more accurate statement is they didn’t have the guts to try... it would’ve certainly meant they would have to take more enforcement / punitive measures.
It was a standard set in response to an era that ended a long time ago. It was a matter of time.

I don’t have a problem with the “employment” aspect, necessarily. I also don’t have a problem with equal bonus incentives. Just pointing out that the big money for football bonuses is going to have a trickle down effect on recruiting for every other sport.

The other aspect of my question stems from the notion that scholarships are becoming less and less relevant in all of this. Limits won’t matter if guys take payment in lieu of scholarship. Many may be inclined to do just that since they don’t intend to be in college long anyway... it’s going to be interesting to see how the NCAA rebrands itself to survive. I suspect they may try to become a national student athlete union of sorts.
 

Peacone36

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,446
Location
Maine
The entire campus is filled with students on scholarship who are also employees of the college. Ever walked into the library, or into the IT department, or had a TA, or an RA in college? They are also welcome to start their own businesses, sell their NILs, work in ads, be influencers, etc. and NO ONE bats an eyelid. Heck, they're celebrated as entrepreneurs.

The only ridiculous part in this entire situation is how "Student Athletes" somehow were deprived of basic rights that everyone else has. Is there a single other scholarship recipient on campus that has to forsake the ability to work, or receive gifts from family and friends, etc. to maintain their scholarship?

The biggest irony, of course, are the people who keep whinging upon about freedom are the ones that are most defensive about this highly illegal, highly anti-capitalist, and highly unfreedomlike suppression of the individual's rights to compete in the market.
I haven’t been keeping up with this argument because TL:DR, I thought I was long winded at times but when y’all get riled up, holy moly.

Regardless, I’m fully in favor of YouTube and TikTok monetization and making $ off of your likeness/opinions. What I am against is selling recruits to the highest bidder being legal simply because you’re too incompetent to enforce your own system while seeking a media victory instead of investing a little grey matter equity into the solution.
 

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,856
I think what I mainly struggle with on the NIL topic (across all sports by the way) is the rapidly increasing explicit acceptance of the implicit practice that the experience of student athletes is becoming completely divorced from the academic/cultural/community sense of the schools they play for.

Kids are just picking to follow the money (which is fine in a professional sports path) but it is eroding the identity of college athletics. Over the last 30 or 40 years, it has become expected for top athletes to "play" at going to class to retain eligibility only long enough to bounce. Why do we enable that further? Why not push the cost and responsibility of a farm system developing the next wave of future NBA/NFL guys back onto the professional leagues which REALLY make the money?

I despise the notion of competing in an endeavor that is, by default, imbalanced. Salary caps / drafts / free agency rules / franchise tags / collective bargaining rights are all partially responsible for keeping the professional sports teams "competitive" against each other. I don't think it is good for the health of the game to further devalue the education part of why the NCAA was supposed to exist in the first place.

To me it has been a total institutional failure by the NCAA and I want my orange bowl trophy back dagnabit. Haha

Exits soap box.
 

MidtownJacket

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
4,856
Then you have never liked college sports. College sports are inherently imbalanced, always have been and always will be. The institutions have different purposes, different student bodies, and different fans.
Agree that some imbalance always existed.

A primarily STEM based school with a small enrollment compared to a larger state school whose mission is educating kids beyond the HS level will always have imbalance.

This notion though, of it not being about the school but just the team or player, feels foreign to the ideal I have of college athletics.

I don’t follow GT sports because of the stand alone production value the team has, I follow them because I have a shared experience and sense of community with them.

That’s what makes the wins sweeter and the losses more tolerable for me as a fan. Maybe that style of fandom is less common than I realize, but why would I watch college sports without it? If it’s just a professional process then I’m better off watching better talent compete in the pros. The same way I don’t follow my high school sports team despite their comparatively better performance than GT’s. They were multi year repeating state champs in 5A and I certainly had some formative years in the stands and on campus.

That balance of game day experience v athletic quality always felt just right to me about college sports. It is a bummer to think the sport might be different enough by the time my kids are in college to have lost that magic.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,189
Then you have never liked college sports. College sports are inherently imbalanced, always have been and always will be. The institutions have different purposes, different student bodies, and different fans.
Heck, there’s imbalance in the pros too. The Mets are outspending the Rays by 4 or 5 times this year on players. The Warriors are paying bonkers luxury tax numbers to keep their team intact, I think with similar multiples compared to the bottom teams. But those leagues also have mechanisms to give back hope and prevent having less money from being a death sentence. A lot of people love the underdog stories that still happen.

Anything other than “I want to see the best players and teams every year” bandwagon chasing (which, honestly, feels like it would be better for my mental health, lol) takes finding some rooting interest behind just “they’re the best!”

I’m all for finding some way to balance NIL or salaries or whatever with roster continuity and academic requirements.
 

Peacone36

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,446
Location
Maine
Then you have never liked college sports. College sports are inherently imbalanced, always have been and always will be. The institutions have different purposes, different student bodies, and different fans.
Forgive my ignorance but isn’t this the reason/point of the sports governing body? To, to the best of their ability, even the playing field via rules and regulations and create a system that requires schools to decide which percentage of their budget to dump into recruiting while also enforcing a lawful system that disallows outside ancillary aid from third parties?

Budget allowances can change from school to school but legalizing a not so silent auction for high school kids is ridiculous.
 

ESPNjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,527
Forgive my ignorance but isn’t this the reason/point of the sports governing body? To, to the best of their ability, even the playing field via rules and regulations and create a system that requires schools to decide which percentage of their budget to dump into recruiting while also enforcing a lawful system that disallows outside ancillary aid from third parties?

Budget allowances can change from school to school but legalizing a not so silent auction for high school kids is ridiculous.
The main reasons the NCAA exists historically is to:

1. Keep the athletes from becoming employees (the title "student-athlete" was invented for this purpose)
2. Because the schools don't trust each other to follow agreed upon guidelines, which include third party compensation and other things like recruiting calendars
3. Manage the championships of the sports other than football

Other reasons for the organization are generally propaganda to make it seem like it is an organization trying to do good things.

Number one is why it formed in the first place.
 

orientalnc

Helluva Engineer
Retired Staff
Messages
9,828
Location
Oriental, NC
The main reasons the NCAA exists historically is to:

1. Keep the athletes from becoming employees (the title "student-athlete" was invented for this purpose)
2. Because the schools don't trust each other to follow agreed upon guidelines, which include third party compensation and other things like recruiting calendars
3. Manage the championships of the sports other than football

Other reasons for the organization are generally propaganda to make it seem like it is an organization trying to do good things.

Number one is why it formed in the first place.
From the NCAA website:

18 college football players died in 1905 due to injuries received while playing football. The NCAA has drifted a bit from that original mission in its beginning.
 

Northeast Stinger

Helluva Engineer
Messages
10,692
From the NCAA website:

18 college football players died in 1905 due to injuries received while playing football. The NCAA has drifted a bit from that original mission in its beginning.
And, I remember reading, that initially schools could not be trusted about bringing in non-student ringers to play football. Stipulating that you must be a student in good standing has been the on-going goal, and war zone, of much of the NCAA history.

But, yes, protecting student athletes was job one. Sadly, even this has been politicized at times, like slowly stripping away features of Paul Johnson’s offense as if it were as deadly as the “flying wedge.”
 

ESPNjacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,527
From the NCAA website:

18 college football players died in 1905 due to injuries received while playing football. The NCAA has drifted a bit from that original mission in its beginning.
The modern NCAA began in 1951 with Walter Byers. Its predecessors aren't relevant to pretty much anything.

Byers came to understand that the system he had put in place was outdated and exploitative. This is a must-read for those who opine on this subject.

Walter Byers
 
Top