|
Post by n00b on Jun 21, 2021 15:53:50 GMT -5
The problem, IMO, is actually quite fundamental to college sports. On the one hand, you have a system where (despite all the student-athlete talk), you essentially have people getting compensated to play sports. It's a job. But on the other hand, the *value* from college sports derives from the "college" part. The audience for college sports is vastly bigger than the audience for minor-league professional and semi-pro sports. And that's entirely because people identify with the colleges -- either because they went to one or because they are geographically associated with one. The question is how much of this value would be lost if the schools gave up the thin pretext that these teams are just "college students" playing for "their school". If teams were openly just hired athletes playing under the sponsorship of the schools, would people still care? More importantly to the NCAA, would they still spend money? Yup. You can argue that they are getting paid 250k which is the cost of tuition and fees, and then the value of their degree in terms of earning power. IMO it’s how insane the coaches salaries are that makes what their getting seem like “wait a f’ng minute”? Most professions where the money in the pot is huge, that money isn’t going to the general employees. Id also mention that this isn’t a problem in college sports, it’s a problem in major college sports, in two sports. The two sports that fund the other 22 sports. I guess I am just less bothered by Ohio State's football coach getting rich when the football team's success is funding a TREMENDOUS student athlete experience for the Buckeyes' synchronized swimmers.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Jun 21, 2021 15:56:30 GMT -5
I'm torn. On the one hand, I think athletes should be fairly compensated for the promotional/commercial usage of their identities/images/visages. On the other hand, I'm wary of over-commercialization and don't like the idea of star players making big money selling plumbing services, used cars, shoes, pizzas, condoms, or whatever, while the "grunts" make nothing. I do think star athletes should be able to sign with an agent following their sophomore year, within some limits. Some schools have greater market value than others, which could lead to even greater recruiting imbalances/advantages. I'm in favor of a national package of compensation/benefits negotiated with athlete-representatives that would be equally available to all athletes, whether in revenue or non-revenue sports.
|
|
|
Post by HawaiiVB on Jun 21, 2021 16:09:15 GMT -5
Yup. You can argue that they are getting paid 250k which is the cost of tuition and fees, and then the value of their degree in terms of earning power. IMO it’s how insane the coaches salaries are that makes what their getting seem like “wait a f’ng minute”? Most professions where the money in the pot is huge, that money isn’t going to the general employees. Id also mention that this isn’t a problem in college sports, it’s a problem in major college sports, in two sports. The two sports that fund the other 22 sports. I guess I am just less bothered by Ohio State's football coach getting rich when the football team's success is funding a TREMENDOUS student athlete experience for the Buckeyes' synchronized swimmers. But that trickle-down bs is why certain power conferences don't want to share. The leaders of those conferences are making bank. To them as long as they are bringing in the spoils to the schools, who's going to complain about the current system? That's why the mid-majors are crying foul, they know that if there were no sharing of the spoils from those two sports, women's volleyball would be on a more even field... the amount of really elite Women's vb players today are spread throughout the country and if they had the same resources as the power five, they could beat them on talent alone. Something as basic as the training table. The minimum one meal a day versus as many meals you want is a huge difference to an athlete. Or sponsored equipment including shoes. Or what about how you are transported to the away games. To me, you should be winning if you have all the resources.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 21, 2021 16:20:31 GMT -5
The two sports that fund the other 22 sports. I guess I am just less bothered by Ohio State's football coach getting rich when the football team's success is funding a TREMENDOUS student athlete experience for the Buckeyes' synchronized swimmers. But that trickle-down bs is why certain power conferences don't want to share. The leaders of those conferences are making bank. To them as long as they are bringing in the spoils to the schools, who's going to complain about the current system? That's why the mid-majors are crying foul, they know that if there were no sharing of the spoils from those two sports, women's volleyball would be on a more even field... the amount of really elite Women's vb players today are spread throughout the country and if they had the same resources as the power five, they could beat them on talent alone. Um ... I know you are coming from the perspective of Hawaii, but the idea that non-P5 universities are terribly upset about the competitive balance (or lack thereof) in NCAA women's volleyball seems a little unlikely to me. Hawaii is one of the very few places where that might actually be true.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jun 21, 2021 16:40:18 GMT -5
The two sports that fund the other 22 sports. I guess I am just less bothered by Ohio State's football coach getting rich when the football team's success is funding a TREMENDOUS student athlete experience for the Buckeyes' synchronized swimmers. But that trickle-down bs is why certain power conferences don't want to share. The leaders of those conferences are making bank. To them as long as they are bringing in the spoils to the schools, who's going to complain about the current system? That's why the mid-majors are crying foul, they know that if there were no sharing of the spoils from those two sports, women's volleyball would be on a more even field... the amount of really elite Women's vb players today are spread throughout the country and if they had the same resources as the power five, they could beat them on talent alone. Something as basic as the training table. The minimum one meal a day versus as many meals you want is a huge difference to an athlete. Or sponsored equipment including shoes. Or what about how you are transported to the away games. To me, you should be winning if you have all the resources. This take is so wrong. As mike pointed out, yes, Hawaii is probably the exception and will be probably the only mid-major to benefit from athletes being able to profit from NIL. But my original post was about where NCAA revenue goes. If that goes towards paying athletes, I can guarantee mid-majors would fall even further behind. Power 5 TV contracts generate tens of millions of dollars each year. If some sort of payment is allowed, the biggest beneficiaries will be programs like Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Mississippi State, Arizona State, etc. Instead of being on equal footing with mid-majors, they'd be able to offer bigger payments. (No take here about whether paying college athletes is right or wrong, just that it would result in an even bigger gap between the Power 5 and everybody else)
|
|
|
Post by gibbyb1 on Jun 22, 2021 14:13:55 GMT -5
But that trickle-down bs is why certain power conferences don't want to share. The leaders of those conferences are making bank. To them as long as they are bringing in the spoils to the schools, who's going to complain about the current system? That's why the mid-majors are crying foul, they know that if there were no sharing of the spoils from those two sports, women's volleyball would be on a more even field... the amount of really elite Women's vb players today are spread throughout the country and if they had the same resources as the power five, they could beat them on talent alone. Something as basic as the training table. The minimum one meal a day versus as many meals you want is a huge difference to an athlete. Or sponsored equipment including shoes. Or what about how you are transported to the away games. To me, you should be winning if you have all the resources. This take is so wrong. As mike pointed out, yes, Hawaii is probably the exception and will be probably the only mid-major to benefit from athletes being able to profit from NIL. But my original post was about where NCAA revenue goes. If that goes towards paying athletes, I can guarantee mid-majors would fall even further behind. Power 5 TV contracts generate tens of millions of dollars each year. If some sort of payment is allowed, the biggest beneficiaries will be programs like Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Mississippi State, Arizona State, etc. Instead of being on equal footing with mid-majors, they'd be able to offer bigger payments. (No take here about whether paying college athletes is right or wrong, just that it would result in an even bigger gap between the Power 5 and everybody else) This ruling and specifically what Kavanaugh said related to future lawsuits is a death sentence for the NCAA as we know it in my opinion.
|
|
moody
Banned
Posts: 18,679
|
Post by moody on Jun 22, 2021 16:28:35 GMT -5
This take is so wrong. As mike pointed out, yes, Hawaii is probably the exception and will be probably the only mid-major to benefit from athletes being able to profit from NIL. But my original post was about where NCAA revenue goes. If that goes towards paying athletes, I can guarantee mid-majors would fall even further behind. Power 5 TV contracts generate tens of millions of dollars each year. If some sort of payment is allowed, the biggest beneficiaries will be programs like Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Mississippi State, Arizona State, etc. Instead of being on equal footing with mid-majors, they'd be able to offer bigger payments. (No take here about whether paying college athletes is right or wrong, just that it would result in an even bigger gap between the Power 5 and everybody else) This ruling and specifically what Kavanaugh said related to future lawsuits is a death sentence for the NCAA as we know it in my opinion. Let's hope so.
|
|
|
Post by HawaiiVB on Jun 22, 2021 17:24:56 GMT -5
This take is so wrong. As mike pointed out, yes, Hawaii is probably the exception and will be probably the only mid-major to benefit from athletes being able to profit from NIL. But my original post was about where NCAA revenue goes. If that goes towards paying athletes, I can guarantee mid-majors would fall even further behind. Power 5 TV contracts generate tens of millions of dollars each year. If some sort of payment is allowed, the biggest beneficiaries will be programs like Maryland, Indiana, Rutgers, Mississippi State, Arizona State, etc. Instead of being on equal footing with mid-majors, they'd be able to offer bigger payments. (No take here about whether paying college athletes is right or wrong, just that it would result in an even bigger gap between the Power 5 and everybody else) This ruling and specifically what Kavanaugh said related to future lawsuits is a death sentence for the NCAA as we know it in my opinion. I agree. I was around when the NCAA took over AIAW. They were promising a better monetary deal for most schools. I think that history was the end of true women's college amateur sports in D1. Back in those days, it was for the love of competition on a shoestring budget. Volleyball was a simpler game and the level of competition was narrower. But the truth was that schools played anyone, there was no RPI, No power conference, no giant facilities. You had the regional rankings and top teams will go to the dance. Mostly on win-loss. I think the NCAA is going to try and self-regulate hoping to squash future lawsuits, but it will be momentary because Justice Kavanaugh basically provides a blueprint for more lawsuits. Remember they could only rule on the lower courts' ruling which had a narrow take. Kavanaugh's concurrent statement is implying, that there needs to be a broader examination on whether student-athletes are employees or are they, independent contractors.
|
|
|
Post by HawaiiVB on Jun 22, 2021 17:35:03 GMT -5
But that trickle-down bs is why certain power conferences don't want to share. The leaders of those conferences are making bank. To them as long as they are bringing in the spoils to the schools, who's going to complain about the current system? That's why the mid-majors are crying foul, they know that if there were no sharing of the spoils from those two sports, women's volleyball would be on a more even field... the amount of really elite Women's vb players today are spread throughout the country and if they had the same resources as the power five, they could beat them on talent alone. Um ... I know you are coming from the perspective of Hawaii, but the idea that non-P5 universities are terribly upset about the competitive balance (or lack thereof) in NCAA women's volleyball seems a little unlikely to me. Hawaii is one of the very few places where that might actually be true. Yes, just from my perspective. Looking back on this past season, I chuckled a little when some schools complained about traveling so far because everyone was playing in the same facility. Hawai'i has to do that every year. And most times some of the girls are sick because of it or they are jet-lagged or stressed out over traveling over four time zones. It was easier to travel to the regionals within your region and then on to the nationals, not being placed into a hole that may leave you going all the way to Illinois or beyond just to fill a region. But I guess, boohoo.
|
|
|
Post by Brutus Buckeye on Jun 25, 2021 18:28:05 GMT -5
Which active NCAA VB player currently has the largest social media following, now that Kayla Simmons has exhausted her athletic eligibility?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jun 25, 2021 23:04:22 GMT -5
Which active NCAA VB player currently has the largest social media following, now that Kayla Simmons has exhausted her athletic eligibility? Grace Tulevech (Lafayette) has 2.3 million Tik Tok followers.
|
|