TN to add 'talent fee' to all tickets

RamblinRed

Helluva Engineer
Featured Member
Messages
5,790
My thoughts on this are that most AA's will try to do this. They will attempt to pass this cost along to the consumer to the extent that the consumer will accept it.

Also, all this just further shows that the more things change the more things stay the same.
I don't think NIL/pay to play - whatever you want to call it is going to make things more competitive, at least at the top. It is likely to be the same 10-12 schools that have mostly been playing for championships that will continue to play for championships. That is just how the sport is set up and every decision that has been made is designed to keep that hierarchy in place.
With it more out in the open there is more money going into the system in the short term to pay players, whether that is sustainable is a question mark.

You can argue that below the top tier that all this makes things more competitive but i'm not sure that is really true. I think it is more that the same 40ish schools are still all relatively competitive with each other, they are just spending more to be that way.

Is all this change - NIL/transfer portal, etc. more likely to make GT able to compete for championships - no. It simply allows GT to stay in that group of 40 or so schools that are fighting tooth and nail every year to try to get to a good bowl and every once in a while (every 5 or 10 years) get one of the last playoff slots.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,282
Location
Auburn, AL
How could it not? We watched in a totally different era. Where this is going I do not want to go. Change is inevitable. Not all change is good. Yes, my age taught me that.
Here's an interesting fact.

In 2005, the entire Auburn University athletics budget was $62 million. When Pat Dye was hired in 1982, it was a fraction of that. (Auburn renovated its athletic fields, all of them, for $100,000 then .... using volunteers. That doesn't happen today.) Today, the budget is $193 million.

Our demands as fans no longer include a hot dog and Coke on a Saturday afternoon. Hype videos, national matchups with lots of travel, analysts, administration, amenities, etc ..... are driving the cost to produce this "product" to enormous levels. The same thing happened to the NFL.

It is what it is.
 

Tommy_Taylor_1972

GT Athlete
Messages
163
This is my personal opinion about the lawsuit and college athletics in general. If this case is actually settled, each of the14,500 plaintiff NCAA student athletes since June 2016 gets $125,000, a years salary after taxes (~$90,000) for a new GT graduate. All the thousands of athletes before 2016 will be alienated by the fact that these these athletes who joined the lawsuit will bankrupt their school's athlete departments to include payments for future athletes. As a former college Georgia Tech scholar athlete, I feel that way. Of course, many of today's athletes do not feel that way, probably because they know that they will not be prepared for life after college attendance, note I did not say graduation with an above average salary. The sad part is lawyers make more money and the media companies get to keep their money made on the Student Athletes. The schools suffer.

As a side note, I heard yesterday that the Georgia governor Kemp yesterday signed an executive order for Georgia Universities athletic departments/associations to be able to pay their athletes directly, pending the outcome of the NCAA lawsuit about direct pay to athletes. This is addition to the NIL compensation.
 

Techster

Helluva Engineer
Messages
18,131
Are you a lawyer specializing in antitrust? If not, thanks for sharing other’s opinions. If so, you should contact the NCAA and the House court and offer help, because clearly they have no clue about antitrust law since they are proposing a “cap”.

Capping pay and collective bargaining is a federal issue that's been tested and upheld for decades now. This really isn't a debate. Even the article you're referring to admits there will be conflicts with state laws and federal legislation (which I highlighted).
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,031
Here's an interesting fact.

In 2005, the entire Auburn University athletics budget was $62 million. When Pat Dye was hired in 1982, it was a fraction of that. (Auburn renovated its athletic fields, all of them, for $100,000 then .... using volunteers. That doesn't happen today.) Today, the budget is $193 million.

Our demands as fans no longer include a hot dog and Coke on a Saturday afternoon. Hype videos, national matchups with lots of travel, analysts, administration, amenities, etc ..... are driving the cost to produce this "product" to enormous levels. The same thing happened to the NFL.

It is what it is.
What was their bagman budget? I know several Auburn booster families down here in Albany who WERE the bagman. The stories are funny as heck regarding how players were paid or induced.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,031
I'm not there just yet, but I don't like where all this is headed. If I'm being honest (taking off the old gold colored glasses) I don't see how we can compete (certainly on a regular basis or maybe even ever) with the factories in this environment. I get it and if this is what the top 15 - 20 - 25 programs can support than have at it. But for the rest of us, and as painful as it would be to start, I think a second-tier level without all this NIL, revenue-sharing, etc. would be appropriate.
In this environment? What? We haven’t been competing the past 50 years because they paid players while we didn’t. Now that it’s above board suddenly you are upset. I can’t understand why fans are upset now when they have been watching their beloved GT lose year after year to UGA in an unfair bogus game every November. You guys sat there in ignorant bliss I guess. I could barely watch those games because I knew they were semi pros while we were student athletes. I freaking love NIL because now we have some hired guns out there too.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,601
Capping pay and collective bargaining is a federal issue that's been tested and upheld for decades now. This really isn't a debate. Even the article you're referring to admits there will be conflicts with state laws and federal legislation (which I highlighted).
Aside from your changing the NCAA's language in your response ("may" to "will"), can you speculate on why the NCAA's attorneys, who presumably are well-steeped in antitrust and labor law, would propose a cap? I'm not arguing that a cap doesn't violate federal statutes, but am genuinely curious why the NCAA would publish such a thing if they know it won't fly, as you are implying.
 

WreckinGT

Helluva Engineer
Messages
3,111
As a side note, I heard yesterday that the Georgia governor Kemp yesterday signed an executive order for Georgia Universities athletic departments/associations to be able to pay their athletes directly, pending the outcome of the NCAA lawsuit about direct pay to athletes. This is addition to the NIL compensation.
I don't really understand how you can pass laws to undermine lawful rules set by associations that its members all willingly agreed to. This is all headed for some kind of lawsuit against the NCAA but these laws are pure theatre.
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,817
Aside from your changing the NCAA's language in your response ("may" to "will"), can you speculate on why the NCAA's attorneys, who presumably are well-steeped in antitrust and labor law, would propose a cap? I'm not arguing that a cap doesn't violate federal statutes, but am genuinely curious why the NCAA would publish such a thing if they know it won't fly, as you are implying.
One thing you are missing is that it isn't a proposed cap on NIL. It is a limit on what the schools can provide directly to the athletes. Athletes could still make whatever they can negotiate from collectives, or if they were using actual NIL, from people who want to advertise or promote. I don't think it would be an issue to limit what the schools can pay -directly- to the athletes, but they cannot put limits on what the athletes can earn.
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,601
One thing you are missing is that it isn't a proposed cap on NIL. It is a limit on what the schools can provide directly to the athletes. Athletes could still make whatever they can negotiate from collectives, or if they were using actual NIL, from people who want to advertise or promote. I don't think it would be an issue to limit what the schools can pay -directly- to the athletes, but they cannot put limits on what the athletes can earn.
I get that. From the NCAA (emphasis mine): "Any institutional NIL payments would apply toward the 22% cap. Third parties may continue to enter into NIL agreements with student-athletes."

Perhaps it's @Techster that is missing some of the nuances. My back-and-forth argument was based on this blanket statement "There can't be a compensation "cap" (whether NIL, salary, etc.) without collective bargaining..."
 

RonJohn

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,817
I get that. From the NCAA (emphasis mine): "Any institutional NIL payments would apply toward the 22% cap. Third parties may continue to enter into NIL agreements with student-athletes."

Perhaps it's @Techster that is missing some of the nuances. My back-and-forth argument was based on this blanket statement "There can't be a compensation "cap" (whether NIL, salary, etc.) without collective bargaining..."
I agree with his comments about that. The NIL collectives are basically proxies for the athletic associations/teams. The "institutional" payments are not really any different than what is happening now, except for semantics about where the money comes from. I don't understand why there is even a 22% from the institutions clause in the settlement. Maybe the P4 conferences are trying to force the NCAA to allow direct payments? But that doesn't really make sense because the P4 and P2 have basically said they are at some point going to remove themselves from the NCAA. I do agree with @Techster that the only way to go forward without having any legal issues would be to have a collective bargaining agreement. If you have a collective bargaining agreement, then the terms are set and everyone agrees to them. Without that, any future student-athlete could sue.
 

cpf2001

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,048
I think a cap is dicey legally but I think the NCAA lawyers are motivated by many of their stakeholder schools to try to avoid a true Wild West AND to try to ignore true collective bargaining. So they’re hail marying.

Imagine if you worked for a company and them and their top competitors all decided to formally cap the salary for your role, in collusion with each other. It would get blown up by the courts when it came out like the Apple/Google no-poaching thing a few years back.

The Supreme Court has hinted strongly that they view it as very close to an employee relationship like a pro sports league or like that Apple example, leading to the assumption by many that this is actually still very challengable.
 

forensicbuzz

21st Century Throwback Dad
Messages
8,546
Location
North Shore, Chicago
One thing you are missing is that it isn't a proposed cap on NIL. It is a limit on what the schools can provide directly to the athletes. Athletes could still make whatever they can negotiate from collectives, or if they were using actual NIL, from people who want to advertise or promote. I don't think it would be an issue to limit what the schools can pay -directly- to the athletes, but they cannot put limits on what the athletes can earn.
That's where this is all going to break down. Because, now the schools will compensate the students with cash and the legal bagmen will continue to help attract the top talent. When it was all about outside the universities, the AA's weren't involved. Now, there'll be two pots of $$.
 

SOWEGA Jacket

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,031
That's where this is all going to break down. Because, now the schools will compensate the students with cash and the legal bagmen will continue to help attract the top talent. When it was all about outside the universities, the AA's weren't involved. Now, there'll be two pots of $$.
Agreed. Except there will also be an another source of compensation. The illegal bagmen. It’s not going away especially with caps in place.
 

MacDaddy2

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
375
Location
The Island of Relevancy
I'm not there just yet, but I don't like where all this is headed. If I'm being honest (taking off the old gold colored glasses) I don't see how we can compete (certainly on a regular basis or maybe even ever) with the factories in this environment. I get it and if this is what the top 15 - 20 - 25 programs can support than have at it. But for the rest of us, and as painful as it would be to start, I think a second-tier level without all this NIL, revenue-sharing, etc. would be appropriate.
"41% of GT graduates are millionaires", this is how we freaking compete. We should never confuse cheapness with the inability to compete.
 
Top