Death of College Football and Amateurism

[leftybuff]

Based upon your above clarifications, you and I agree more than we disagree. You're right, that many of these kids do decide to take this route on their own....but an 18 yo kid is usually naive to the realities of what they're getting themselves in to. That's why I used the hypothetical, hindsight scenario.

I just have a problem with those that say "A free education should be enough for these kids". That was true for a long time, but in todays current environment, when there is SO much damn money being shared amongst everyone except for the guys putting the ass on the line, it no longer holds water. I think everyone needs to be very careful about how this is approached so as to not kill college football, but that doesn't change the fact (in my opinion) that the current set up is inherently unfair and unsustainable.

The money already has killed CFB. At least, killed it in the sense that it was reasonably untainted by strictly monetary concerns. I mean, when you have suffered the indignity of the Cheez-It Bowl, the Poulan-Weedeater Independence Bowl and the Beef O'Brady Bowl, your soul was sold a long time ago.

Players now skip bowl games for NFL money. Games are played at ridiculous hours, and sometimes ridiculous days, to accommodate TV revenue. The on-campus experience is now pre-packaged, managed and the crowds herded and fleeced at a clip only slightly less obnoxious than the NFL.

The bowl system, quirky, flawed and the font of endless argument over who was really #1, has been discarded. Goofy or not, that system made CFB unique, but that has been packaged and turned out on the metaphoric street corner for the TV pimp who demands a playoff and a real, quantifiable and marketable champion.

You might as well pay the players.

All Rights Reserved, leftybuff Enterprises, 2019.

 

[hawg1]

Astute legal analysis. SIAP

https://www.si.com/college-football/2019/09/30/fair-pay-to-play-act-law-ncaa-california-pac-12Astute legal analysis.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

The money already has killed CFB. At least, killed it in the sense that it was reasonably untainted by strictly monetary concerns. I mean, when you have suffered the indignity of the Cheez-It Bowl, the Poulan-Weedeater Independence Bowl and the Beef O'Brady Bowl, your soul was sold a long time ago.

Players now skip bowl games for NFL money. Games are played at ridiculous hours, and sometimes ridiculous days, to accommodate TV revenue. The on-campus experience is now pre-packaged, managed and the crowds herded and fleeced at a clip only slightly less obnoxious than the NFL.

The bowl system, quirky, flawed and the font of endless argument over who was really #1, has been discarded. Goofy or not, that system made CFB unique, but that has been packaged and turned out on the metaphoric street corner for the TV pimp who demands a playoff and a real quantifiable and marketable champion.

You might as well pay the players.

All Rights Reserved, leftybuff Enterprises, 2019.

Yet it's still like 1,000x better than the NFL.

 

[leftybuff]

Yet it's still like 1,000x better than the NFL.

True. I still watch CFB, I no longer watch the NFL...I haven't for probably ten years now. I could say why, but it isn't important.

BTW, you infringed my copyright by quoting. I'll let it slide this time.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

True. I still watch CFB, I no longer watch the NFL...I haven't for probably ten years now. I could say why, but it isn't important.

BTW, you infringed my copyright by quoting. I'll let it slide this time.

 

[Alfred91]

If I'm Nebraska or BYU, schools that have passionate fan bases but have been struggling as of late, I'm jizzing my shorts right now. As a CU fan, I'm completely bummed.

Think about it - Nub fans will buy tons of t-shirts and give advertising deals to even marginal kids. Here, we'd be lucky if Viska got a deal with Dealin' Doug.

Back to 3 stars and "coach em up" we go.

 

[letsgoavs192]

Liberals ruin everything

 

[InTheBuff]

Never change.

If it had been a Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Ohio, Wyoming, Rhode Island or wherever else governor who signed it I'd still be calling them idot.
I believe the Gov signed something that sounds all warm and fuzzy without thiking about the repercussions.

 

[Duff Man]

If it had been a Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Ohio, Wyoming, Rhode Island or wherever else governor who signed it I'd still be calling them idot.
I believe the Gov signed something that sounds all warm and fuzzy without thiking about the repercussions.

I totally believe you.

 

[hawg1]

If it had been a Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Ohio, Wyoming, Rhode Island or wherever else governor who signed it I'd still be calling them idot.
I believe the Gov signed something that sounds all warm and fuzzy without thiking about the repercussions.

What if he considered all angles and signed the bill? That’s possible right. Maybe he merely thinks differently that you. Now the work begins. The NCAA has to come to be table, or go away.

 

[BuffUp]

Put me on the record of not liking this. These kids get their degree paid for, exposure to the nfl and nfl scouts, top notch training facilities, doctors and trainers, nutritionist, coaching from the best coaches in the business, shoes, clothes, etc... I do understand that "people" are getting rich off these athletes, but in what business does someone NOT get rich off others?? I just don't like it. It will turn into basketball and baseball.

 

[leftybuff]

Put me on the record of not liking this. These kids get their degree paid for, exposure to the nfl and nfl scouts, top notch training facilities, doctors and trainers, nutritionist, coaching from the best coaches in the business, shoes, clothes, etc... I do understand that "people" are getting rich off these athletes, but in what business does someone NOT get rich off others?? I just don't like it. It will turn into basketball and baseball.

Duly noted.

 

[InTheBuff]

What if he considered all angles and signed the bill? That’s possible right. Maybe he merely thinks differently that you. Now the work begins. The NCAA has to come to be table, or go away.

Well it's obvious he thinks differently than me. I think this stinks to high heaven.

 

[hawg1]

Well it's obvious he thinks differently than me. I think this stinks to high heaven.

Are you in favor of a trust, whereby earnings are held until graduation?

 

[CPVbuff]

Put me on the record of not liking this. These kids get their degree paid for, exposure to the nfl and nfl scouts, top notch training facilities, doctors and trainers, nutritionist, coaching from the best coaches in the business, shoes, clothes, etc... I do understand that "people" are getting rich off these athletes, but in what business does someone NOT get rich off others?? I just don't like it. It will turn into basketball and baseball.

There is a mock up of a similar bill in Colorado. This CA Bill has a more libertarian bent than a dem. In CO It’s written by conservatives, my read is they won’t do a thing a let Polis take the lead. It seems a waste time to like or dislike. My guess that we end up with an additional classification of super elite schools. Maybe 32. That are competing for national championships and big money. Pretty narrow window for Colorado to compete Unless we can have the weed industry involved. JK

 

[leftybuff]

There is a mock up of a similar bill in Colorado. This CA Bill has a more libertarian bent than a dem. In CO It’s written by conservatives, my read is they won’t do a thing a let Polis take the lead. It seems a waste time to like or dislike. My guess that we end up with an additional classification of super elite schools. Maybe 32. That are competing for national championships and big money. Pretty narrow window for Colorado to compete Unless we can have the weed industry involved. JK

If it passes, and Colorado goes all in, CU can smoke the competition in the Green Solution Bowl.

 

[Medford M.]

Liberals ruin everything

Isn't this bill kind of a pro capitalism thing? Seems more right-centric than left.

 

[InTheBuff]

Are you in favor of a trust, whereby earnings are held until graduation?

That would be the best solution but is it really going to go in that direction? My biggest fears is a 'wild west' attitude with dealership's and the such.

 

[Leon Sandcastle]

The money already has killed CFB. At least, killed it in the sense that it was reasonably untainted by strictly monetary concerns. I mean, when you have suffered the indignity of the Cheez-It Bowl, the Poulan-Weedeater Independence Bowl and the Beef O'Brady Bowl, your soul was sold a long time ago.

Players now skip bowl games for NFL money. Games are played at ridiculous hours, and sometimes ridiculous days, to accommodate TV revenue. The on-campus experience is now pre-packaged, managed and the crowds herded and fleeced at a clip only slightly less obnoxious than the NFL.

The bowl system, quirky, flawed and the font of endless argument over who was really #1, has been discarded. Goofy or not, that system made CFB unique, but that has been packaged and turned out on the metaphoric street corner for the TV pimp who demands a playoff and a real, quantifiable and marketable champion.

You might as well pay the players.

All Rights Reserved, leftybuff Enterprises, 2019.

Truth. You combine this with the fact that participation in high school football has been on the decline for over a decade, and this is a recipe for the sport to be non-existent as we know it within 20-30 years.

At some point, the powers that be will need to publicly recognize that a) Football is an inherently dangerous sport, and b) It should be treated differently than the rest of college athletics (as it relates to amateurism) if the sport is going to survive.

 

[BuffLuke80]

They all say money makes the world go round. I don't think it's a good idea, really. Usually, things about ****ing money aren't. Hope they know they're doing.

 

[skibum]

That would be the best solution but is it really going to go in that direction? My biggest fears is a 'wild west' attitude with dealership's and the such.

1. You're not the only one in the entire world that doesn't want unbridled, unrestricted free agency in college football. That's also what a very large majority of college football fans don't want.

2. There is a large number of people who also think the current system is inherently unjust. (See: CA legislation)

Big, big, big point #1 and #2 are not incompatible.

About the only practical way to reconcile 1 & 2 is with trusts available after graduation or medical retirement. That's what makes the most sense, and that's what we'll likely end up with.

The only question is going to be if it will be an "individual" trust, or a "collective" trust - and if it's a collective trust, collective at what level (school, conference, P5, FBS, NCAA, ???).

 

[Big Jim]

They all say money makes the world go round. I don't think it's a good idea, really. Usually, things about ****ing money aren't. Hope they know they're doing.

Things "about money":

- College football playoffs
- NCAA basketball tournament
- Conference championship games in football
- Conference playoffs in basketball
- Nike/Adidas/UA paying colleges to use their uniforms and shoes as advertising billboards
- Stadium naming rights


Some people like some of the things on that list, some don't, but they are all money driven at their core.

 

[MtnBuff]

1. You're not the only one in the entire world that doesn't want unbridled, unrestricted free agency in college football. That's also what a very large majority of college football fans don't want.

2. There is a large number of who also think the current system is inherently unjust. (See: CA legislation)

Big, big, big point #1 and #2 are not incompatible.

About the only practical way to reconcile 1 & 2 is with trusts available after graduation or medical retirement. That's what makes the most sense, and that's what we'll likely end up with.

The only question is going to be if it will be an "individual" trust, or a "collective" trust - and if it's a collective trust, collective at what level (school, conference, P5, FBS, NCAA, ???).

Some good questions here.

I think the logic behind the law is typical worker vs. establishment thinking with the idea that if somebody makes money off somebody else they are exploiting them.

The only real hope for this situation is to see legislation at the federal level that gives the NCAA the power to restrict individual players from earning money beyond the defined benefits in the NCAA rules. It would require some form of compromise to get it through and a part of that could be a collective trust, probably at the NCAA level for FBS. It might also involve some form of long term medical coverage for injuries sustained while playing.

Another element of this, and I have written about it before, would be some form of federal oversight of collegiate athletics which would allow for some form of real enforcement against schools like Baylor, Nebraska, Michigan State, Penn State, Miami, etc. which engage in cover ups of clearly illegal activities that have real victims outside of the athletic programs.

This enforcement office would fall under Title IX authority and be able to penalize schools by shutting off federal grants, research dollars, and most importantly eligibility for federally guaranteed student loans.

 

[Buffs35]

When this goes nationwide, SEC players are going to be pissed that their payments from boosters are subject to taxes.

 

[skibum]

Some good questions here.

I think the logic behind the law is typical worker vs. establishment thinking with the idea that if somebody makes money off somebody else they are exploiting them.

The only real hope for this situation is to see legislation at the federal level that gives the NCAA the power to restrict individual players from earning money beyond the defined benefits in the NCAA rules. It would require some form of compromise to get it through and a part of that could be a collective trust, probably at the NCAA level for FBS. It might also involve some form of long term medical coverage for injuries sustained while playing.

Another element of this, and I have written about it before, would be some form of federal oversight of collegiate athletics which would allow for some form of real enforcement against schools like Baylor, ****braska, Michigan State, Penn State, Miami, etc. which engage in cover ups of clearly illegal activities that have real victims outside of the athletic programs.

This enforcement office would fall under Title IX authority and be able to penalize schools by shutting off federal grants, research dollars, and most importantly eligibility for federally guaranteed student loans.

If I were to guess, how it plays out is that the NCAA will blow its wad trying to fight this politically, fail miserably, and then in the 11th hour they'll freak out and try put together some sort of NCAA-wide trust.

The P5 conferences will realize early on that the NCAA is going to fail in its fight, and they'll either have conference level trusts or a collective P5 trust ready to roll once it becomes obvious to everyone that the NCAA's fight is doomed. They'll dictate terms to the NCAA, and if the NCAA doesn't like them, they'll leave.

Side note: if I were the NAIA, I'd be figuring out rule changes and setting up a trust scheme that would satisfy the P5 schools, the P5 conferences, and the CA bureaucrats who will write the implementing regulations for this law, and then quietly inform the P5 schools that you've got a ready-made solution for them when the NCAA crash and burns.

 

[BUFFering]

Put me on the record of not liking this. These kids get their degree paid for, exposure to the nfl and nfl scouts, top notch training facilities, doctors and trainers, nutritionist, coaching from the best coaches in the business, shoes, clothes, etc... I do understand that "people" are getting rich off these athletes, but in what business does someone NOT get rich off others?? I just don't like it. It will turn into basketball and baseball.

Let's go line by line...

• Degree: Totally fair and valuable
• Exposure to NFL: 16,000 players in NCAA football, ~300 rookies in NFL...a benefit to a very few. Remember that UCF kicker who was deemed ineligible because of his youtube account? Not NFL caliber so this law helps him leverage the small spark of fame he has too make some cash
• Training/Doctors: I'd f'ing hope so considering the beating they take daily and weekly. Might as well tack on the free water they get.
• Coaches: As a fan of a team that has willingly employed Dan Hawkins, Jon Embree, and Mike Mac's G5 assistants I'm not sure if you're joking
• Swag: I've received at least a grand worth of swag from my company at events this year alone. Somehow they still find a way to pay me.

The issue isn't that Person/Institution X is getting rich off Person Y. The issue is that Person Y isn't allowed to get rich also even if it doesn't meaningfully diminish the wealth of Person X.

 

[Buffnik]

It isn’t bull****. What’s bull**** is pretending that a 50-100K free ride to college is somehow a useless perk. If you’re too ****ing stupid to take advantage of free education that’s your own damn fault.

Nobody makes them go to college, nobody makes them play football, they do that on their own.

I’ve changed my mind, let them get paid. Then take the scholarships away and make them pay like the rest of us for everything.

It's bull****, but only in context of the overall revenue of the enterprise they are part of.

We have other merit scholarships on campus. Maybe a music scholarship for a talented performance artist, for example. Or maybe a math whiz. They contribute something special to the university environment which the university values highly enough to recruit them to attend while providing a scholarship, housing and other costs of attendance.

That's also been the deal for athletes (though they didn't even get the cost-of-living stipend until recently while also having restrictions placed on them with what jobs they were allowed to have).

But there's a fundamental difference between the music prodigy and the football prodigy: that music prodigy is not part of a music program that's delivering $50 million a year in concert ticket and broadcast revenue. If he/she were, wouldn't we be saying that the person should earn some of that money instead of protecting the sanctity of being an "amateur musician" working in exchange for an education?

I think this issue is actually pretty simple when I look at coach salaries and the money available to pay buyouts while the players get nothing. I also don't see why they should be barred from selling an autograph or appearing in advertising or whatever.

The only place this gets murky to me is with the Title IX implications. All women's sports lose money. Is it a violation of federal law if only football and men's basketball players get paid as scholar-athletes?

But if we keep it to athletes profiting off their own name and likeness outside of any revenue share from the universities, then what's the big deal? I don't particularly care if a pianist on scholarship signs an endorsement deal with Steinway or if a football player gets some money from Nike or a swimmer with Speedo.

 

[jizzrag85]

It's bull****, but only in context of the overall revenue of the enterprise they are part of.

We have other merit scholarships on campus. Maybe a music scholarship for a talented performance artist, for example. Or maybe a math whiz. They contribute something special to the university environment which the university values highly enough to recruit them to attend while providing a scholarship, housing and other costs of attendance.

That's also been the deal for athletes (though they didn't even get the cost-of-living stipend until recently while also having restrictions placed on them with what jobs they were allowed to have).

But there's a fundamental difference between the music prodigy and the football prodigy: that music prodigy is not part of a music program that's delivering $50 million a year in concert ticket and broadcast revenue. If he/she were, wouldn't we be saying that the person should earn some of that money instead of protecting the sanctity of being an "amateur musician" working in exchange for an education?

I think this issue is actually pretty simple when I look at coach salaries and the money available to pay buyouts while the players get nothing. I also don't see why they should be barred from selling an autograph or appearing in advertising or whatever.

The only place this gets murky to me is with the Title IX implications. All women's sports lose money. Is it a violation of federal law if only football and men's basketball players get paid as scholar-athletes?

But if we keep it to athletes profiting off their own name and likeness outside of any revenue share from the universities, then what's the big deal? I don't particularly care if a pianist on scholarship signs an endorsement deal with Steinway or if a football player gets some money from Nike or a swimmer with Speedo.

I’m 100% on board with them being able to make money, sign autographs, be sponsored etc. I’m just worried it’s really going to ruin the sports. We already see in basketball how certain teams dominate the landscape and crazy enough they’re all in trouble now.

I guess in the end the whole system is ****ed anyways so what’s the point? We can’t stop players from being paid or bribed so I guess all this is doing is making it public.

 

[Buffnik]

I’m 100% on board with them being able to make money, sign autographs, be sponsored etc. I’m just worried it’s really going to ruin the sports. We already see in basketball how certain teams dominate the landscape and crazy enough they’re all in trouble now.

I guess in the end the whole system is ****ed anyways so what’s the point? We can’t stop players from being paid or bribed so I guess all this is doing is making it public.

Pretty much. The real change is that the local car dealer owner uses the football players in an actual advertising piece to justify giving them use of a car, keeping it above board, rather than providing the car under the table while getting no business promotional benefit as is currently the case.

 

[96 Buff]

Legalize the activity and regulate it so it's in the open. Like weed.

I expect many of those arguing against this were/are against weed legalization.