Jump to content

Scholarship limits no longer matter


Mikey

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, McLoofus said:

Exactly. How much are boosters going to pay for dozens of superfluous, marginal players? How many quality players are going to accept short term small potatoes to stand on a sideline instead of going somewhere they can get on the field and give themselves a real shot at an NFL contract?

Not sure why we're even talking about it, though, since several changes that we were assured were going to end college football have already been implemented. I guess it's just the ghost of CFB that we're all talking about these days. 

I think the biggest impact will be on sports that have limited scholarships baseball and softball come to mind.  I could even see club Sports like Wrestling, Rugby and Lacrosse provide kids an opportunity to earn enough to defray costs and play a sport at a school even though at Club level not as school sponsored sport.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





17 hours ago, Proud Tiger said:

Sadly I think college FB as I have known and loved it is a thing of the past. It is now going to be more semi-pro. Money is ruling. I wouldn't be surprised to soon see most TV  games pay for view.

If that happens I will vote with my checkbook and find something else to do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AuburnNTexas said:

I think the biggest impact will be on sports that have limited scholarships baseball and softball come to mind.  I could even see club Sports like Wrestling, Rugby and Lacrosse provide kids an opportunity to earn enough to defray costs and play a sport at a school even though at Club level not as school sponsored sport.

For sure.

So much possibility. So much opportunity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The push for the NIL partly came about because the NCAA refused to enforce the recruiting rules evenly and everybody knew it. The players wanted their cut and the USSC agreed. Basically, the NCAA has thrown up it's hands. There is no reason to believe a neutered NCAA will enforce any NIL rules they come up with any better than they did NCAA recruiting rules. If they do it will likely go to court anyway.  

I would think a big pocket donor that isn't just altruistic would want to get the best players he can find for his investment, not average ones. He would want to help the football program as much as possible. He could put 10 players on an NIL contract that pays their college costs and a $50,000 signing bonus in exchange for (fill in the blank). Someone will do that somewhere in the country if they haven't already. So, it's either time to get creative or get left behind.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IronMan70 said:

The push for the NIL partly came about because the NCAA refused to enforce the recruiting rules evenly and everybody knew it. The players wanted their cut and the USSC agreed. Basically, the NCAA has thrown up it's hands. There is no reason to believe a neutered NCAA will enforce any NIL rules they come up with any better than they did NCAA recruiting rules. If they do it will likely go to court anyway.  

I would think a big pocket donor that isn't just altruistic would want to get the best players he can find for his investment, not average ones. He would want to help the football program as much as possible. He could put 10 players on an NIL contract that pays their college costs and a $50,000 signing bonus in exchange for (fill in the blank). Someone will do that somewhere in the country if they haven't already. So, it's either time to get creative or get left behind.

I think it would have came about no matter what NCAA did it could have done. It is time for them to get paid for the risk they are taking, no matter the impact to CFB.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IronMan70 said:

The push for the NIL partly came about because the NCAA refused to enforce the recruiting rules evenly and everybody knew it. The players wanted their cut and the USSC agreed. Basically, the NCAA has thrown up it's hands. There is no reason to believe a neutered NCAA will enforce any NIL rules they come up with any better than they did NCAA recruiting rules. If they do it will likely go to court anyway.  

I would think a big pocket donor that isn't just altruistic would want to get the best players he can find for his investment, not average ones. He would want to help the football program as much as possible. He could put 10 players on an NIL contract that pays their college costs and a $50,000 signing bonus in exchange for (fill in the blank). Someone will do that somewhere in the country if they haven't already. So, it's either time to get creative or get left behind.

The push came because the NCAA is corrupt, making money hand over and wanted to keep it for themselves. Even rules wouldn’t have changed a thing. The players smartened up like most groups tend to do historically when they find out they are actually worth something. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/15/2021 at 10:39 PM, Mikey said:

I'm no legalist, but I don't see anything in this link that would prohibit athletes in Alabama from doing the same: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/alabama-becomes-10th-state-to-enact-name-image-and-likeness-legislation-student

As I understand the Utah situation, the Universities are expressly allowed to direct donor funds to walk-ons, and I believe the donor talked to University employees (coaches) about it beforehand. In Alabama (and other states), the University is not allowed to participate in securing funds for players or in directing those funds. The Alabama law and most others require the NIL contracts to be negotiated between the contract parties, with University review after negotiation but before payment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, DAG said:

The push came because the NCAA is corrupt, making money hand over and wanted to keep it for themselves. Even rules wouldn’t have changed a thing. The players smartened up like most groups tend to do historically when they find out they are actually worth something. 

The push for NIL started because players were irritated at the rules preventing them from profiting. They didn't ask for a split of the NCAA's revenue. They just wanted the NCAA to stop blocking them from making their own money.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 1:55 PM, McLoofus said:

For sure.

So much possibility. So much opportunity. 

They could get paid to play at Club level anyway. The NCAA only barred payment for participation in NCAA sports. I doubt you'll see any trickle down to Club sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mcgufcm said:

The push for NIL started because players were irritated at the rules preventing them from profiting. They didn't ask for a split of the NCAA's revenue. They just wanted the NCAA to stop blocking them from making their own money.

And guess what? That wouldn't have had to happen if they were offered something or anything. Those rules were implemented due to the NCAA hence my first comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, mcgufcm said:

They could get paid to play at Club level anyway. The NCAA only barred payment for participation in NCAA sports. I doubt you'll see any trickle down to Club sports.

I wasn't referring to club sports but other non-revenue NCAA sanctioned sports. But I see why it appeared otherwise from my response. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

I wasn't referring to club sports but other non-revenue NCAA sanctioned sports. But I see why it appeared otherwise from my response. 

Oh, then I agree. I think NCAA Olympic sports (for lack of a better name to give them) will benefit.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, DAG said:

The push came because the NCAA is corrupt, making money hand over and wanted to keep it for themselves. Even rules wouldn’t have changed a thing. The players smartened up like most groups tend to do historically when they find out they are actually worth something. 

Yes, the NCAA is very corrupt and greedy, no doubt. We're talking almost the same thing. My emphasis was more on the enforcement of and not so much the rules themselves. The rules I was referring to were the recruiting rules the NCAA turned a blind eye to for certain teams and not for others. The players on the teams breaking the rules and getting away with it were doing just fine. So "partly" motivated by that, the rest of the CFB players wanted a piece of the action and rightfully got it. I think it's great. The players can get paid and it puts the rest of the teams more on an even keel to compete with the cheaters favored by the NCAA. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Hank2020 said:

I think it would have came about no matter what NCAA did it could have done. It is time for them to get paid for the risk they are taking, no matter the impact to CFB.

I totally agree, it was past time. My point was the NCAA was just using the rules as a means to favor certain teams over others and its been going on for years.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mcgufcm said:

As I understand the Utah situation, the Universities are expressly allowed to direct donor funds to walk-ons, and I believe the donor talked to University employees (coaches) about it beforehand. In Alabama (and other states), the University is not allowed to participate in securing funds for players or in directing those funds. The Alabama law and most others require the NIL contracts to be negotiated between the contract parties, with University review after negotiation but before payment.

The laws may be different in different states, but there is nothing in Alabama's law that would prevent a booster or group of boosters from doing the same thing BYU is doing, should they choose to do so. It would simply have to be done using a slightly different method. A number of one on one deals instead of all the walkons in a package.

Edited by Mikey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, mcgufcm said:

They could get paid to play at Club level anyway. The NCAA only barred payment for participation in NCAA sports. I doubt you'll see any trickle down to Club sports.

True but with NIL and Social Media I think Players at Club Level can use this as a way to fund raise for the individual. They probably could have before but didn't realize it now if they play it right they could use this as a tool.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, AuburnNTexas said:

True but with NIL and Social Media I think Players at Club Level can use this as a way to fund raise for the individual. They probably could have before but didn't realize it now if they play it right they could use this as a tool.  

The Rugby club could afford to buy more leather balls! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...