Note from Juanyeh Thomas
- Thread starter TheFlyest
- Start date
jgtengineer
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 2,969
Title 9 is why. You cannot say we are going to pay the Football players 100k a year or something (100k X 105 because scholarship or not they are doing the same job thus are employees and fall into equal pay laws) the Basketball players something else, then turn around and say Softball womens basketball baseball and every other sport makes no money so no pay for the athletes. And if you use your two revenue earning sports to pay every athlete... they won't make enough.
The likeness clause that just passed in cali is how this gets solved, not the schools paying them more than a scholarship.
Ibeeballin
Im a 3*
- Messages
- 6,081
I’m pretty sure this has been proven not true
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/14/5613112/ncaa-title-9-ed-obannon
jgtengineer
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 2,969
Proven its a weak excuse. But as it stands right now and how the NCAA goes about it they would have to make a ton of changes to save non revenue sports. Right now these sports are funded by the revenue of the mens football and basketball programs. If that goes to the players its inevitable the other sports get cut.
These are specifically the words of title IX that are problematic.
Athletics programs are considered educational programs and activities. There are three basic parts of Title IX as it applies to athletics:
- Participation: Title IX requires that women and men be provided equitable opportunities to participate in sports. Title IX does not require institutions to offer identical sports but an equal opportunity to play;
- Scholarships: Title IX requires that female and male student-athletes receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation; and
- Other benefits: Title IX requires the equal treatment of female and male student-athletes in the provisions of: (a) equipment and supplies; (b) scheduling of games and practice times; (c) travel and daily allowance/per diem; (d) access to tutoring; (e) coaching, (f) locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; (g) medical and training facilities and services; (h) housing and dining facilities and services; (i) publicity and promotions; (j) support services and (k) recruitment of student-athletes.
Could the NCAA do something to fix it and make sure the non rev sports are still a thing? yep the article you linked goes into detail about that. But as it stands right now that is not the case.
Edit to add. Ballin I get what you are saying about being able to have disparate pay and have it not violate title IX. but that is only if its a pay for likeness rights, not the actual act of paying to play.
I actually think this is what we are going to see come out of this ruling. Schools buying the rights to use an athelete for promotional reasons based on marketability. Or the AA doing it etc.
GTZachary
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 234
Most are already compensated far more than their market value. We’re talking about a select <1% of student athletes that are compensated less than their market value. There’s no reason to blow up a system that is a huge positive for most kids. You very well may end up killing the goose.
ramblinjacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 802
The reality is that the best solution is through the free market. And if the free market is in play then one must be prepared to likely see the current status quo and institutions either change significantly or fail.
The situation is rigged by colleges essentially today no differently than taxi medallions are rigged in NY. Large bureaucratic boondoggles are put in place all with the supposed best intentions in mind(safety, children, compassion, amateurism, yada yada) that always lead to unintended consequences. Their only defense against innovation like Uber/Lyft is through further legislation that protects them.
Get the rules out of the way and let the chips fall where they may. It likely means an end to college football as we know it but so be it. I bet there will still be forms of entertainment and a way for people to have a good time and those that provide the entertainment will be paid the value of the entertainment they provide. With the dollars they earn they will have the freedom to spend them as they see fit, such as on their family or education or whatever, just like the rest of us.
No this won't eliminate poverty or mental illness but nothing will. The end result though will be a more just and net beneficial impact on society than any further contrived rule will deliver.
The situation is rigged by colleges essentially today no differently than taxi medallions are rigged in NY. Large bureaucratic boondoggles are put in place all with the supposed best intentions in mind(safety, children, compassion, amateurism, yada yada) that always lead to unintended consequences. Their only defense against innovation like Uber/Lyft is through further legislation that protects them.
Get the rules out of the way and let the chips fall where they may. It likely means an end to college football as we know it but so be it. I bet there will still be forms of entertainment and a way for people to have a good time and those that provide the entertainment will be paid the value of the entertainment they provide. With the dollars they earn they will have the freedom to spend them as they see fit, such as on their family or education or whatever, just like the rest of us.
No this won't eliminate poverty or mental illness but nothing will. The end result though will be a more just and net beneficial impact on society than any further contrived rule will deliver.
Eli
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,614
Correct so how do we expect to pay players if we are barely above water. Now look at the school endowment. It is not losing money but we aren't standing up for the thousands of other kids
Jacketman
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 232
Many schools couldn't afford to pay athletes in every sport, it just wouldn't be possible. Only the richest could succeed in this system I think. ur athletic department is not exactly flush with money right now iirc.
And how would you pay the players? Take our FB team as an example. Would Juanyeh and Liam Byrne(walk on QB) be paid the same? If you pay one guy on the team, you have to pay all of them. So would you pay every member of every team that we have at GT the same set salary? If you pay FB more than Softball or Girls Basketball, isn't that some sort of violation? What if another school offers more money than GT does? Wouldn't recruiting just become a bidding war, almost like free agency in pro sports leagues? How would G5 schools with average to below average money be able to survive?
And how would you pay the players? Take our FB team as an example. Would Juanyeh and Liam Byrne(walk on QB) be paid the same? If you pay one guy on the team, you have to pay all of them. So would you pay every member of every team that we have at GT the same set salary? If you pay FB more than Softball or Girls Basketball, isn't that some sort of violation? What if another school offers more money than GT does? Wouldn't recruiting just become a bidding war, almost like free agency in pro sports leagues? How would G5 schools with average to below average money be able to survive?
Boaty1
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,104
Nobody seems to have answers to these questions. Most just want to jump and down say something needs to change.
I don't see anyway you can do it and maintain any form of the current structure. And maybe that's what some want is a complete overthrow of the NCAA.
rfripp68
Georgia Tech Fan
- Messages
- 57
There are a million different arguments as to how to accomplish something with regard to paying players/allowing them to be paid. I don't think it's a question that only a few programs (OSU, Texas, Bama, etc) would actually be able to afford to pay anyone out of their athletics budget and I doubt the school would oblige to give any of that profit up. It would have to be something outside the current setup. And different people have different ideas on what that means so I think people get too much of a one track mind with one part of the argument and say "well see this obviously won't work because of A/B/C so we should stick to the current system".
That's not to say I have the solution because I definitely don't - but I think there are tons of situations where an NCAA rule can be very hurtful/punitive for no reason. In a much more benign example, there was a player (maybe a kicker? I can't remember) who had a relatively successful youtube channel (meaning big enough to get some sort of advertising money) and he was told by the NCAA he either had to shut the channel down or quit football. That's just crazy.
But in general, I think players should be able to profit from their likeness - yes of course it will invite boosters to effectively pay the big recruits/players (guaranteeing jersey sales etc), but the best ones already get paid, just under the table. I think there are only a handful that can even make any real money anyway. Maybe there will be more earlier, but as time goes on I believe the market will set itself right.
Maybe there needs to be a cap on the amount they can make or maybe anything above that cap or maybe a percentage of what they make goes into escrow until they leave school or maybe if they send it all to their family instead of having it themselves there's no cap. I have no idea - maybe something entirely different. But I do know that there are a lot of kids who need or whose family needs money and support - the scholarship is of great value, particularly after college with a degree from a good school that actually teaches you and doesn't just push you through BS classes, however that is not immediately helpful to these kids and their families and that's the problem.
And look, I don't know the numbers as far as how common or rare a situation like homelessness or poverty is to the average NCAA football player or their family, but it does happen and it's unfortunate that there's not a lot that we or the school can do about it due to it being a violation, and if these kids could at the very least have a chance to earn something to send home - or even just to have another meal when they are hungry late a night (the school can provide unlimited food from dining hall but they aren't always open which can cause issues after practice/late classes etc if they are closed and kids have no money to buy food) I think that would be great. But I certainly understand it opens a can of worms, the problem is the current system already has issues so it's about which one has fewer issues / works the best.
gtpi
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,642
- Location
- BFE , south carolina
free market? how are those health insurance and drug scams working for us. thats part of the reason why we have this thread to begin with. a family with mental health issues slipped under that wonderful catch all free market many of you speak of.
gtpi
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,642
- Location
- BFE , south carolina
lmfao
BleedGoldNWhite21
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,474
According to research in 2017 the average cost of tuition for four years in college in the US is $35K. Tim Tebow, Herschel Walker, Calvin Johnson etc definitely earned their respected schools more than $35K. However, does the average student athlete earn their respected schools more than $35K? Absolutely not. I frequent this board quite a lot and went to 5 games and I can probably name 10-15 players on this team. The truth is, we’re spending money on Tech tickets whether it’s Thomas wearing #1 or Reggie Ball.
I believe players should be allowed to profit from their likeness. The Tim Tebows, Herschel Walkers and Calvin Johnsons have every right to make money on jersey sales or represent some local tire store while they are still in college.
However, the school shouldn’t directly pay any athlete. To dismiss a $35K scholarship(depending on what you do with it, it’s worth way more) as non-payment is ABSOLUTELY coming from a place of privilege. What about the kids that come from poverty that don’t play sports that have better grades than a lot of these athletes, but not good enough grades for an academic scholarship? You gonna tell those kids that that scholarship doesn’t mean anything? These players are privileged and they don’t live in the real world.
I believe players should be allowed to profit from their likeness. The Tim Tebows, Herschel Walkers and Calvin Johnsons have every right to make money on jersey sales or represent some local tire store while they are still in college.
However, the school shouldn’t directly pay any athlete. To dismiss a $35K scholarship(depending on what you do with it, it’s worth way more) as non-payment is ABSOLUTELY coming from a place of privilege. What about the kids that come from poverty that don’t play sports that have better grades than a lot of these athletes, but not good enough grades for an academic scholarship? You gonna tell those kids that that scholarship doesn’t mean anything? These players are privileged and they don’t live in the real world.
Boaty1
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,104
Fantastic response.
takethepoints
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 6,096
Ah. The European solution.
I agree that if there was a "free market" solution - i.e. no regs on what athletes would be paid - then there would be no major college sports to speak of. I have no problem at all with that. Virtually every system of higher education (except ours) has no varsity (btw, that's Edwardian English high class slang for university) teams and don't want them. If you want to play ball, get in touch with the pros or join the national amateur athletic associations. This would work fine for the US; there's no reason for the taxpayers to fund big time college sports, directly or indirectly. I'd miss Tech football, but other organizations play the sport and it might make for more opportunity for young people who want to play - like the four high school grads who started on D for the Seahawks last Sunday - and not study.
But, let's face it, that ain't happening. There'll be some changes for the likeness licensing, but I think they'll be more marginal then we anticipate. Everyone can see where paying athletes would go and nobody with the power to change things has much interest in having that happen. Or, to be more exact, I don't think they do. Hope I'm right.
AlabamaBuzz
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 4,020
- Location
- Hartselle, AL (originally Rome, GA)
It is probably a moot point, but the scholarship that these athletes receive is much, much more than just tuition. (it includes room, board, books, fees, some clothes, etc.) It is still probably only an average of 40-65K, which is not a lot, but still. And, in the case of private schools, it is well into the hundreds of thousands.
wrmathis
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 930
- Location
- Bonaire GA
Let players get money for likeness, but If they do, they don’t receive a scholarship. They pay their on way. Bet people would appreciate the value of a scholarship then.
ramblinjacket
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 802
I don't believe free markets created bad people, they have always existed and always will. Besides health insurance in particular is not a free market.
There is no perfect solution to any issue but my inclination is towards freedom which has a track record to create opportunities rather than more well intentioned rules with unintended consequences.
vadimivich
Georgia Tech Fan
- Messages
- 81
- Location
- Wien, Österreich
On a larger societal scale - poverty in America is at grossly unacceptable levels. The only thing that makes this story shocking or newsworthy is that he was an elite athlete and thus had an opportunity to possibly break out of the below subsistence level living his family was (and still is) in. There's millions of more people in America who are in the same situation as his family.
Living overseas for such a large portion of my adult life, the 2 things that always surprise me when I return to the USA (especially in the south) are how fat everyone is and how much abject poverty there is. Living in the USA you become numb to it, it's just part of life ... but it's nothing like most other major developed countries. Landing after 12-18 months away and it's always so shocking to see.
The situation this family found themselves in should not be possible in 2019 in one of the richest countries in the world. Sadly, it's only remarkable for being utterly unremarkable.
Living overseas for such a large portion of my adult life, the 2 things that always surprise me when I return to the USA (especially in the south) are how fat everyone is and how much abject poverty there is. Living in the USA you become numb to it, it's just part of life ... but it's nothing like most other major developed countries. Landing after 12-18 months away and it's always so shocking to see.
The situation this family found themselves in should not be possible in 2019 in one of the richest countries in the world. Sadly, it's only remarkable for being utterly unremarkable.