Jump to content

NCAA moves toward allowing athletes to be paid sponsors


Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, loviubb said:

I say let them go!! Getting a FREE EDUCATION IS PAYMENT ENOUGH! Why does the majority of students have thousands in debt for their education and a poor  athlete has zero. If you are going to pay them aren't they pros? Maybe I think I would rather watch STUDENT ATHLETES in college giving their all instead of a semi pro college player shutting down on the team because he or she are hurt and may hurt their draft stock. Just my view on pay for play in college

Could not have said it better myself.

Oh, by the way.... Noah Vonleh says... "hello".   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, loviubb said:

I was thinking of your thoughts about Noahs time at IU when I wrote the shutting down😉

As you know. I feel strongly about this. SHUT DOWN THE OAD RULE.... yesterday !  Kid quit on IU, in order not to hurt his NBA draft order. And yes, he is making the bucks, in the NBA. Bouncing from team to team  Coulda, woulda, shoulda done that by never ever coming to IU.  AND NOW !  He is a member of the Denver Nuggets !  If it were not for the Joker or Gary Harris.... I might never watch another Nuggets game....till he is gone again.

Thanks for being an Hoosier Sports Nation member.  And above all..... stay safe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, dbmhoosier said:

Are schools like Oregon and WSU with Phil Knight and the Koch brother now going to be FF favorites every year?

I can't foresee the future, but I doubt that will happen. Every university has their major donors. We have Cuban and a whole host of others, it doesn't mean that they'll be spending a whole bunch of money on recruits. Plus UK and Duke pretty much already get the 8 best recruits most years and it's doesn't necessarily mean they make it to the final 4. 

We also have to remember that 'donors' donate. Donations have tax benefits. Sponsoring a player is a marketing expense for a business. Big businesses have shareholders and are accountable for making smart marketing decisions. It's not likely Phil Knight will convince Nike to spend over market value on an athlete to bring them to Oregon just because he likes Oregon. That's not a smart business decision. 

That said, I think if there are regulations, an athlete will need to be sponsored by a "legitimate business". For instance a shell company called Wildcat Enterprises can't be set-up solely to filter money of wealthy UK donors to athletes. There will also have to be some sort of definition to what constitutes an 'exchange of services' when it comes to NLI to prevent people from just giving money to athletes. I'm not sure how any of this works from a legal standpoint; i'm just thinking out loud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have really mixed feelings on this. On one hand, I think the kids probably do deserve the ability to monetize the celebrity that comes with playing major college sports. They've put the work in and the money is there. There are a lot of rich old people getting more and more money off the backs of these kids. We're talking billions of dollars and these people and entities are also playing a big role in where the kids go, etc. These kids also put in an incredible amount of time and work while getting publicly scrutinized by people like us all over the internet. 

It's probably the right thing to do to allow them to monetize their likeness. 

With all of that said, as someone that was an NCAA scholarship basketball player (albeit at a lower level), it really ticks me off when the value of the scholarship gets minimized by people pushing for the players to get paid. The fact that I got to walk away from college with an education and zero debt was absolutely HUGE. I can tell you, if I had to pay off college loans there is no way I could have taken that first job out of college with the Celtics. I wouldn't have been able to move to and live in Boston with the salary they were paying me. Being debt free after college is invaluable. 

Also, these kids live in the lap of luxury at these high major schools. I can't stand when LeBron and his crew paint it like these athletes are living in a cardboard box starving. They have state of the art facilities and living spaces, elite training equipment and staffs, team chef's, meals plans, etc., etc. It's a good life. 

Finally, this one is selfish, but if I want to watch professional basketball, I'll watch professional basketball. I worry what it does to the sport if they start getting paid. Does a players time and loyalty lie with a sponsor or the team? What if a car dealer want a player at a commercial shoot but Archie needs him in study hall or at workout? What happens to a guy like Devonte Green if one of his sponsors is unhappy with his play?

Is big car dealer guy going to be happy paying guys shooting 32% from 3 on an 18 win team that misses the tournament? What is the impact that has.

I think it's probably the right thing to do, but as a fan (and this is selfish) I really worry what this does to college basketball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, loviubb said:

I say let them go!! Getting a FREE EDUCATION IS PAYMENT ENOUGH! Why does the majority of students have thousands in debt for their education and a poor  athlete has zero. If you are going to pay them aren't they pros? Maybe I think I would rather watch STUDENT ATHLETES in college giving their all instead of a semi pro college player shutting down on the team because he or she are hurt and may hurt their draft stock. Just my view on pay for play in college

That they all graduate with no debt and the school is totally free is a myth. Most athletes in most sports receive only partial scholarships. Even those in basketball and football, which received full scholarships, leave school with an average of $12k student debt. College athletics is basically the same as having a full time job while attending school so even if they could get a job, they wouldn't have a lot of time to do so. They're also restricted by rules as to which types of other assistance they can receive to pay for school.

Ivy League doesn't give athletic scholarships at all. D3 athletes also do not receive athletic scholarships. D2 and smaller D1 schools can give scholarships but they may not always.

Some may say that athletes from the sports other than basketball and football wouldn't be well known enough to earn endorsements anyways so they wouldn't benefit from this rule change. This simply isn't true. Lilly King is a world-record holder and an Olympic gold medalist in swimming. You've probably heard of her. She could've cashed in after the Olympics but chose instead to return to college. She's just one example of someone from another sport that could have made a lot of money from endorsements while in school and probably had only a partial scholarship. Even those who wouldn't be known to the general public would be known to others who follow the sport.

https://collegead.com/how-much-debt-are-student-athletes-leaving-with/

https://www.credible.com/blog/student-loans/athletic-scholarships-dont-guarantee-debt-free-college-degree/

https://www.debt.org/students/athletic-scholarships/

Back to the marquee sports, they generate billions of dollars for the NCAA and schools and this trickles down to millions for the coaches and hundreds of thousands for assistant coaches (sometimes around $1M). Yet they're told they're not allowed to profit in any way other than an education.

People also complain about players leaving early for the draft even though there is no chance they will be drafted. Those players might stay if they can make decent money while in school rather than trying to make it in the G League or overseas. 

This rule change, coupled with the probably change to the transfer rule, will greatly change college basketball and football but I'm all for it. They're in the interest of the players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, loviubb said:

I say let them go!! Getting a FREE EDUCATION IS PAYMENT ENOUGH! Why does the majority of students have thousands in debt for their education and a poor  athlete has zero. If you are going to pay them aren't they pros? Maybe I think I would rather watch STUDENT ATHLETES in college giving their all instead of a semi pro college player shutting down on the team because he or she are hurt and may hurt their draft stock. Just my view on pay for play in college

The thing is we are talking about at the most 2% of all college basketball players so I am not in favor of changing all the rules for that low amount of players.  If you want to go play pro ball then let them and leave college basketball for student athletes.  Losing the top 10 players from a recruiting class is not going to kill the sport and to me it will make it better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

The thing is we are talking about at the most 2% of all college basketball players so I am not in favor of changing all the rules for that low amount of players.  If you want to go play pro ball then let them and leave college basketball for student athletes.  Losing the top 10 players from a recruiting class is not going to kill the sport and to me it will make it better.

We're talking about many more than that. The OAD rule affects only that 2% but this rule change will affect many more than that over all sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, go_iu_bb said:

We're talking about many more than that. The OAD rule affects only that 2% but this rule change will affect many more than that over all sports.

Do you really think that more than just the stars will get must endorsement opportunities because I don't.  it will still be the star players getting those dollars and the rest will not.  If that happens then you will see more resentment between the players as well..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Do you really think that more than just the stars will get must endorsement opportunities because I don't.  it will still be the star players getting those dollars and the rest will not.  If that happens then you will see more resentment between the players as well..

Yes, I do. For one thing, it's not restricted to endorsements. The teams can have autograph signing events (through the school, someone else sets it up, or the players themselves set it up) which charges admission which is then distributed between the athletes is one example. The athletes can also hold camps/teach classes and get paid for those. The athletes might not be stars in college but they very well could still be home town heroes with companies there willing to pay them for their endorsement. Then there are athletes who are popular despite not being stars in their sport. Priller, for example, probably could've made good money even though (or maybe because) he rarely saw PT.

As far as resentment, it's rare for people in the position to make exactly the same amount of money. Even more unlikely in sports. I think the athletes understand this. It can be viewed as a "welcome to the real world" type of lesson.

Nothing is ever completely "fair" but this is certainly more fair for the athletes who rake in huge amounts of money to the NCAA and schools instead of trying to pretend they're amateur athletes playing amateur sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watching the draft last night and seeing the houses some of these prospects were in made me wonder how impoverished these players are. They were in some very nice houses so either they are not as poor as they make it seems or they were given some extra benefits from their schools.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Yes, I do. For one thing, it's not restricted to endorsements. The teams can have autograph signing events (through the school, someone else sets it up, or the players themselves set it up) which charges admission which is then distributed between the athletes is one example. The athletes can also hold camps/teach classes and get paid for those. The athletes might not be stars in college but they very well could still be home town heroes with companies there willing to pay them for their endorsement. Then there are athletes who are popular despite not being stars in their sport. Priller, for example, probably could've made good money even though (or maybe because) he rarely saw PT.

As far as resentment, it's rare for people in the position to make exactly the same amount of money. Even more unlikely in sports. I think the athletes understand this. It can be viewed as a "welcome to the real world" type of lesson.

Nothing is ever completely "fair" but this is certainly more fair for the athletes who rake in huge amounts of money to the NCAA and schools instead of trying to pretend they're amateur athletes playing amateur sports.

Despite not playing, Priller could have made a killing partnering with a T-shirt company or some apparel brand (thinking local, not like Adidas) to come out with shirts with his nickname and likeness on them. He was such a fan favorite, they would have sold like hotcakes. Would he make life-changing money with that? No. But he probably could have made a few grand a year for spending money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tdhoosier said:

I can't foresee the future, but I doubt that will happen. Every university has their major donors. We have Cuban and a whole host of others, it doesn't mean that they'll be spending a whole bunch of money on recruits. Plus UK and Duke pretty much already get the 8 best recruits most years and it's doesn't necessarily mean they make it to the final 4. 

We also have to remember that 'donors' donate. Donations have tax benefits. Sponsoring a player is a marketing expense for a business. Big businesses have shareholders and are accountable for making smart marketing decisions. It's not likely Phil Knight will convince Nike to spend over market value on an athlete to bring them to Oregon just because he likes Oregon. That's not a smart business decision. 

That said, I think if there are regulations, an athlete will need to be sponsored by a "legitimate business". For instance a shell company called Wildcat Enterprises can't be set-up solely to filter money of wealthy UK donors to athletes. There will also have to be some sort of definition to what constitutes an 'exchange of services' when it comes to NLI to prevent people from just giving money to athletes. I'm not sure how any of this works from a legal standpoint; i'm just thinking out loud. 

You're absolutely right.   This is the NCAA we're talking about.   There won't possibly be any loop holes or gray areas for UK or Duke to exploit. They know exactly what they're doing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Watching the draft last night and seeing the houses some of these prospects were in made me wonder how impoverished these players are. They were in some very nice houses so either they are not as poor as they make it seems or they were given some extra benefits from their schools.

 

Not even a knock on the family. In fact... more power to them. But to back up what you are saying.  Here's the Denver Bronco's pick.  Would love to have the pool table in the background :

Broncos select Jerry Jeudy with the 15th pick in the 2020 NFL Draft 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Yes, I do. For one thing, it's not restricted to endorsements. The teams can have autograph signing events (through the school, someone else sets it up, or the players themselves set it up) which charges admission which is then distributed between the athletes is one example. The athletes can also hold camps/teach classes and get paid for those. The athletes might not be stars in college but they very well could still be home town heroes with companies there willing to pay them for their endorsement. Then there are athletes who are popular despite not being stars in their sport. Priller, for example, probably could've made good money even though (or maybe because) he rarely saw PT.

As far as resentment, it's rare for people in the position to make exactly the same amount of money. Even more unlikely in sports. I think the athletes understand this. It can be viewed as a "welcome to the real world" type of lesson.

Nothing is ever completely "fair" but this is certainly more fair for the athletes who rake in huge amounts of money to the NCAA and schools instead of trying to pretend they're amateur athletes playing amateur sports.

Would it be more conducive for an Indiana kid to stay in Indiana rather than a duke or Carolina if they can be marketed around their home town for the home state team as opposed to going across the country where you are only known by those that follow basketball?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

Do you really think that more than just the stars will get must endorsement opportunities because I don't.  it will still be the star players getting those dollars and the rest will not.  If that happens then you will see more resentment between the players as well..

Scott, this simply is not true. Let’s remove basketball, football and their stars from this and switch to a secondary sport like swimming (which I know a decent amount about). IU is a big swimming school. Indiana is a very good swimming state. Look at the flier below. Know that all of the athlete sponsors (Finnerty, King, Lazor and Miller) have graduated, but they were just as popular while they were in college. This for profit camp was $300 to register and sold out last year. All of these swimmers are sponsored too. IF they were able to put on this camp while they were students it still would have sold out and they would have been able to make just as much money. These athletes would have also had endorsements while in school if they were allowed. Lilly King won her gold medal WHILE she was in school. Point is, that CBB and CFB ‘stars’ aren’t the only ones who will benefit. This is just one group of swimmers from one university. Also, not pictured (because he isn’t a breaststroker) is IU gold medalist Blake Pieroni; he signed an endorsement deal with Mizuno immediately after he graduated last spring. These endorsement deals aren’t ‘NBA huge’, but they are a good amount of cash. There will be many endorsements across all sports. Beyond endorsements, a student athlete will also be able to host a sports camp and profit from them.

BTW, I hope you are feeling better and your parents are healthy. 

 

EAFFFC68-A1E4-4CC2-891B-21317B82BD04.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, BobSaccamanno said:

It’s perfect for the phony NCAA and its members. They don’t have to pay the athletes.  But they let them get paid by sponsors.  The NCAA and its members aren’t out a single penny.  And they get to pretend it’s some huge concession. 

Hammer, Meet Nail!  BIngo!  and  ______________  [Insert your own exclamation here]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

Scott, this simply is not true. Let’s remove basketball, football and their stars from this and switch to a secondary sport like swimming (which I know a decent amount about). IU is a big swimming school. Indiana is a very good swimming state. Look at the flier below. Know that all of these athletes have graduated, but they were just as popular while they were in college. This for profit camp was $300 to register and sold out last year. All of these swimmers are sponsored too. IF they were able to put on this camp while they were students it still would have sold out and they would have been able to make just as much money. These athletes would have also had endorsements while in school if they were allowed. Lilly King won he gold medal WHILE she was in school. Point is, that CBB and CFB ‘stars’ aren’t the only ones who will benefit. This is just one group of swimmers from one university. Also, not pictured (because he isn’t a breaststroker) is IU gold medalist Blake Pieroni; he signed an endorsement deal with Mizuno immediately after he graduated last spring. These endorsement deals aren’t ‘NBA huge’, but they are a good amount of cash. There will be many endorsements across all sports. Beyond endorsements, a student athlete will also be able to host a sports camp and profit from them.

BTW, I hope you are feeling better and your parents are healthy. 

 

EAFFFC68-A1E4-4CC2-891B-21317B82BD04.jpeg

As a former HS swimmer who still loves the sport, swimming is what I always the first I think of when thinking about "other" sports. These athletes, especially the Olympic level talents, are ones who would really benefit from this. Since the last Olympics King, Ledecky, Manuel, and Dressel all attended college while they could've made very good money from endorsements. Others, like Pieroni, don't have quite the same name recognition to the general public as the previous but are well known to the swimming community and would've done well while in school. Apple is another recent Olympic level swimmer. Foreign national team swimmers like Lanza and Samy could probably cash in with endorsements from their home countries.

There's money there for athletes in other sports. Camps like these are a great example. Even for athletes that aren't national level talents. We're not talking millions of dollars but decent money and certainly more than they are allowed to make now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread got me thinking about the whole Steve Alford suspension for appearing in a charity calendar thing.  So, I googled that.  Found this link to a book documenting some truly ridiculous NCAA actions.

In addition to the Alford suspension, back in the 1980's the NCAA

  • Charged Alabama with a violation for rerouting the team plane so players could attend a teammates funeral.
  • Would not let NC State accept an invitation to the White House after winning the '83 Championship because Washington DC was more than 100 miles from campus.

Now, all of those ridiculous rules have been overturned through the years, but it shows how ridiculously incompetent the organization has been over the years.

https://books.google.com/books?id=1Azyc2LopD0C&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=steve+alford+charity+calendar&source=bl&ots=YwQqwi0Cm6&sig=ACfU3U2P9YzOvCDw6nDqSkso6bb57d_VMg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiIsMvA5YHpAhU-FTQIHfYqAGUQ6AEwDHoECAwQAQ#v=onepage&q=steve alford charity calendar&f=false

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think a scholarship and all the other perks are adequate compensation for student athletes I also believe in capitalism, so why not try a simple solution? 

Let the player decide whether they want to be on scholarship or they want to make their own NLI deals. Scholarships are year-to-year so every year they get to make their own decision with the help of their parents or agents. Many sports don't have full scholarships so the decision will be easy to make. For the full-ride players they can test the water each year or if they have enough name recognition out of high school just "go pro" as a freshman but they can't double-dip.

People will cheat and I'm sure the NCAA can find a way to screw this up but at least it is an idea to think about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, go_iu_bb said:

As a former HS swimmer who still loves the sport, swimming is what I always the first I think of when thinking about "other" sports. These athletes, especially the Olympic level talents, are ones who would really benefit from this. Since the last Olympics King, Ledecky, Manuel, and Dressel all attended college while they could've made very good money from endorsements. Others, like Pieroni, don't have quite the same name recognition to the general public as the previous but are well known to the swimming community and would've done well while in school. Apple is another recent Olympic level swimmer. Foreign national team swimmers like Lanza and Samy could probably cash in with endorsements from their home countries.

There's money there for athletes in other sports. Camps like these are a great example. Even for athletes that aren't national level talents. We're not talking millions of dollars but decent money and certainly more than they are allowed to make now.

Always felt that swimmers put in the hardest work, of all athletes,  and got the least recognition for the work they put in. My son was a HS swimmer as well. And I sat for hours watching him practice with 8 time Olympic Gold Medal winner Amy Van Dyken sitting next to me.  Cherry Creek high school in Greenwood Village, Colorado. Her brother was on the team. A great swimmer, who my son consistently beat in the breast stroke.  Amy gave mucho praise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, milehiiu said:

Always felt that swimmers put in the hardest work, of all athletes,  and got the least recognition for the work they put in. My son was a HS swimmer as well. And I sat for hours watching him practice with 8 time Olympic Gold Medal winner Amy Van Dyken sitting next to me.  Cherry Creek high school in Greenwood Village, Colorado. Her brother was on the team. A great swimmer, who my son consistently beat in the breast stroke.  Amy gave mucho praise.

Wow Mile. That is company with some swimming royalty. Sounds like your son was an impressive swimmer.

As a swimmer and a coach I can say that swimming is definitely a tough sport. They work just as hard physical as other athletes, i wouldn’t necessarily say any more or any less. The challenge in swimming is the mental aspect. In many other sports you are able to distract yourself from the pain, but in swimming your head is under water and you are left alone with your thoughts and your body constantly reminding you how much it hurts. To survive in swimming you you need to develop grit to block that out. The high level swimmers are definitely a different breed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...