The players association

[TexasTiger 13,130]

51 minutes ago, DAG said:

Good questions all around. So much grey area. I am also wondering where they are getting that estimate figure of 20 million. 

Player evaluation becomes more critical. Likely won’t sign many “projects,” which would be a shame. I can’t recall his name, but I remember an OT a few years back that was an obvious project. Didn’t fill out until his senior year, but finally started. And Dee Ford was only 190lbs in high school, but grew into a 1st rounder:

https://www.auburnobserver.com/p/dee-ford-auburn-2013-sacks-pass-rusher-piano
 

College football has provided a lot of kids opportunities to grow into pro athletes, but if they’re pros from the start, expectations will be different. With NIL they already are. 15-20 years ago if a freshman PG played like Aden fans and coaches would be much more patient and give him time to develop. When Sullivan and Beasley played freshmen couldn’t even play varsity ball. Freshmen got to develop outside the glare of the spotlight. 
 

In short, the most developed players will benefit financially immediately (like they are now with NIL), but a lot of kids will have to find their opportunities elsewhere— the have nots will be even more of a developmental league than they are now— which has to frustrate the hell out of those coaches.

[aucom96 1,639]

9 hours ago, autigeremt said:

College Athletics is semi-pro. May as well be ran like it. 

The NFL would be run at the behest of the owners in partnership with the player's union. 

Who "runs" college football in a pay world? The universities? Some sort of booster collective? The broadcasters? 

I think this thing is far more messy than some give it credit for. 

[TexasTiger 13,130]

2 hours ago, aucom96 said:

I think this thing is far more messy than some give it credit for. 

It’s messy as hell. But you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

[Mikey 16,777]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

— the have nots will be even more of a developmental league than they are now— which has to frustrate the hell out of those coaches.

Were I a coach at a G-5 school I think I'd look for another job opportunity. Imagine beating the bushes and finding a diamond in the rough only to have the rich boys come in and plunder your team. That would be the pits.

[TigerPAC 985]

29 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Were I a coach at a G-5 school I think I'd look for another job opportunity. Imagine beating the bushes and finding a diamond in the rough only to have the rich boys come in and plunder your team. That would be the pits.

thats what it is now, already.  even saban admitted tampering with the toledo CB on the draft show.

[TexasTiger 13,130]

7 minutes ago, TigerPAC said:

thats what it is now, already.  even saban admitted tampering with the toledo CB on the draft show.

It will only get worse.

[AU9377 5,136]

I am really over hearing players and others complain about how much the coach makes and how much the school makes while arguing that they should get their share.  That is NOT how the world works.  I don't know of a profession that pays their trainees a percentage of profits.  I certain know none that are the least bit concerned about being fair.

[JuscAUse! 1,497]

29 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

I am really over hearing players and others complain about how much the coach makes and how much the school makes while arguing that they should get their share.  That is NOT how the world works.  I don't know of a profession that pays their trainees a percentage of profits.  I certain know none that are the least bit concerned about being fair.

I'm not saying I agree with everything you said, but it brought back memories. I told my Dad back in the early 70's that something wasn't fair. He explained to me that a fair had carousels for the babies, cotton candy and roller coasters for the kids, and rigged games for the almost grown ups. And that was the only definition of 'fair' that mattered in the real world. And then he said something like 'when life knocks you down, dust yourself off and start over'.  

I digress. It just brought back great memories. 

[TexasTiger 13,130]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

I don't know of a profession that pays their trainees a percentage of profits.

In this scenario who are the “trainees,” what is the “profession” and what is the business? And if your opposed to profit share, what about salaries?

[AU9377 5,136]

11 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

In this scenario who are the “trainees,” what is the “profession” and what is the business? And if your opposed to profit share, what about salaries?

The entire effort to transform collegiate athletics into some type of semi professional league is, in my opinion, a mistake.  Applying the rules of business, in my opinion, is also a mistake.  I understand why we are where we are, but blindly stumbling forward is a recipe for disaster.

An exemption to U.S. anti trust laws is the first step to re-take control of an unsustainable point in time.  I have no problem with student athletes being paid a fair stipend.  That can be called a wage, provided that wage is equal across the board and is not used simply as a recruiting tactic.  Likewise, NIL should actually be NIL.  Remove it from recruiting altogether.

I would have to type ten pages to fully expand on all of this.  I am not rigid in how I believe it should look.  I am certainly open to changing my mind, but what I am confident in is that the way things are now is not something that can work long term. We shouldn't cut our nose off to spite our face.

[TexasTiger 13,130]

30 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

The entire effort to transform collegiate athletics into some type of semi professional league is, in my opinion, a mistake.  Applying the rules of business, in my opinion, is also a mistake.  I understand why we are where we are, but blindly stumbling forward is a recipe for disaster.

An exemption to U.S. anti trust laws is the first step to re-take control of an unsustainable point in time.  I have no problem with student athletes being paid a fair stipend.  That can be called a wage, provided that wage is equal across the board and is not used simply as a recruiting tactic.  Likewise, NIL should actually be NIL.  Remove it from recruiting altogether.

I would have to type ten pages to fully expand on all of this.  I am not rigid in how I believe it should look.  I am certainly open to changing my mind, but what I am confident in is that the way things are now is not something that can work long term. We shouldn't cut our nose off to spite our face.

I don’t disagree with this, but the horse is out of the gate. I think the game and experience will be diminished in many ways from what it was, but that became inevitable with every game being televised and huge tv deals.

You say applying the rules of business is a mistake— you did just that and I was seeking clarification of the analogy you used. Trainees are routinely paid, the question is how. In this case the “trainees” are the product that draws the dollars. The “trainees” are stars, not interns who aren’t entrusted with much. The “trainees” also risk life altering injuries every time they step on the field, practice or game. They could be paid a salary or stipend but universities apparently prefer profit sharing to employee status.

Universities have maximized opportunities for cash at expense of rivalries and tradition, blowing up conferences based on expanding market share. They’ve approached the game as a business and that’s what it’s become. I miss the game. I miss the old rivalries, and the walk-ons who became starters and even major contributors. But universities chose the place we are. 

[AU9377 5,136]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I don’t disagree with this, but the horse is out of the gate. I think the game and experience will be diminished in many ways from what it was, but that became inevitable with every game being televised and huge tv deals.

You say applying the rules of business is a mistake— you did just that and I was seeking clarification of the analogy you used. Trainees are routinely paid, the question is how. In this case the “trainees” are the product that draws the dollars. The “trainees” are stars, not interns who aren’t entrusted with much. The “trainees” also risk life altering injuries every time they step on the field, practice or game. They could be paid a salary or stipend but universities apparently prefer profit sharing to employee status.

Universities have maximized opportunities for cash at expense of rivalries and tradition, blowing up conferences based on expanding market share. They’ve approached the game as a business and that’s what it’s become. I miss the game. I miss the old rivalries, and the walk-ons who became starters and even major contributors. But universities chose the place we are. 

I did do that, because that is where we are now.  Of course, we aren't really solidly in any format.  We are in the world of everyone taking as much of the pie as they can and the heck with the aftermath.  I, and many I know, would be just as entertained if everyone applied Ivy league rules on admitting students and having true student athletes.

The reason I wouldn't push for that is the good that college athletics has done for so many that would not have been admitted without the opportunity afforded by athletics.

[autigeremt 6,776]

In my honest opinion, I believe college athletics is about to see a major dip in attention from fan bases and a drop in popularity overall. They cannot compete with professional sports. Fans will start to find other things to do with their money and merely “watch” from a distance. 

[TigerPAC 985]

3 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I don’t disagree with this, but the horse is out of the gate. I think the game and experience will be diminished in many ways from what it was, but that became inevitable with every game being televised and huge tv deals.

You say applying the rules of business is a mistake— you did just that and I was seeking clarification of the analogy you used. Trainees are routinely paid, the question is how. In this case the “trainees” are the product that draws the dollars. The “trainees” are stars, not interns who aren’t entrusted with much. The “trainees” also risk life altering injuries every time they step on the field, practice or game. They could be paid a salary or stipend but universities apparently prefer profit sharing to employee status.

Universities have maximized opportunities for cash at expense of rivalries and tradition, blowing up conferences based on expanding market share. They’ve approached the game as a business and that’s what it’s become. I miss the game. I miss the old rivalries, and the walk-ons who became starters and even major contributors. But universities chose the place we are. 

by their own choosing....NONE of them have to play sports.  

[cole256 17,084]

Fantastic, all the money being made needs to have eyes on it and needs to be distributed fairly and correctly. There was no reason majority of profits to be going to some old out of shape men who are already wealthy, sitting in a suite watching other people almost kill themselves to make them more money. 

[AU9377 5,136]

22 minutes ago, cole256 said:

Fantastic, all the money being made needs to have eyes on it and needs to be distributed fairly and correctly. There was no reason majority of profits to be going to some old out of shape men who are already wealthy, sitting in a suite watching other people almost kill themselves to make them more money. 

To be fair, I don't believe any of the people you are talking about actually make a dime off the sports they support.  In fact, it is this group that overwhelmingly get called on now to fork over large amounts of money to collectives with no return on their contribution expected.  The profits being made are being spent to support non revenue generating sports, including funding scholarships that otherwise would not be funded.

Nobody forces anyone to play a sport.  The benefits are many, with only a portion being monetary. 

[TexasTiger 13,130]

2 hours ago, AU9377 said:

I did do that, because that is where we are now.  Of course, we aren't really solidly in any format.  We are in the world of everyone taking as much of the pie as they can and the heck with the aftermath.  I, and many I know, would be just as entertained if everyone applied Ivy league rules on admitting students and having true student athletes.

The reason I wouldn't push for that is the good that college athletics has done for so many that would not have been admitted without the opportunity afforded by athletics.

In my perfect world, there would be a reasonable stipend, NIL would be like it is for most “celebrities” , e.g. endorsement deals based on perceived marketable value of the endorsement, transferring would be much easier than it once was, but not induced by financial incentives— theoretically big dollar marketability isn’t tied to location (local endorsements aren’t typically huge), and a huge trust fund would be created for future education/job training/re-training and medical bills resulting from playing days— longterm commitment to a student athletes persisting success. But no one in power has asked me and, yes, I agree— if Auburn was division III and fielded teams of guys who loved the game and representing their school, my support would be no less.

[AU9377 5,136]

4 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

In my perfect world, there would be a reasonable stipend, NIL would be like it is for most “celebrities” , e.g. endorsement deals based on perceived marketable value of the endorsement, transferring would be much easier than it once was, but not induced by financial incentives— theoretically big dollar marketability isn’t tied to location (local endorsements aren’t typically huge), and a huge trust fund would be created for future education/job training/re-training and medical bills resulting from playing days— longterm commitment to a student athletes persisting success. But no one in power has asked me and, yes, I agree— if Auburn was division III and fielded teams of guys who loved the game and representing their school, my support would be no less.

I agree.  I just believe the starter has to be an anti-trust exemption, in order to prevent litigation over every decision.  Some things won't seem fair, but so is life.  If people want a semi-pro league, then by all means go start one. 

[JerryAU 1,694]

If anyone has read into the particulars of the class-action lawsuit House vs NCAA, it is estimated that a settlement will be worked out between both parties, a judge has already hinted that the NCAA (and its member institutions) will be slapped in the face with a +$4Billion lawsuit for backpay to former athletes.  That's a pretty sizeable chunk of money that will be coming out of every NCAA program's pocket to pay former athletes who never got the NIL windfall who want their share of the pie. 

This class-action lawsuit is what has suddenly spurred the NCAA & school presidents to clamor around in Dallas trying to come up with a settlement figure for the backpay to former athletes AND devise a workable plan for the future of college athletics.  

The stubborn old jackasses kicked the can down the road and acted greedy for far too long, then the lawsuits and courts took control and the whole shebang has blown up in their faces. 

 

 

[AUght2win 6,883]

On 4/30/2024 at 7:56 AM, TexasTiger said:

It’s messy as hell. But you can’t put the genie back in the bottle.

Potentially you could if the NFL was forced to create a farm system. Idk if they could lawfully be made to do so. But right now they have a completely free, all-access farm system with college football. 

I don’t know if this would relieve the legal burdens the NCAA is currently facing, but I’ve always understood the main complaint from players/people who side with players is that college aged kids should be able to make money playing football, but they have no option outside CFB, as the NFL has an age requirement and there are no other pro leagues who bring in 18 year old players. 

If an under-22 minor league were created, it could be done the same way MLB does it. NFL teams could draft high school kids and the kids could choose to accept the pro contract or go to college for 3. Their choice. 

This way, the kids who are elite and legitimately could go straight to the pros, can. And the kids who aren’t good enough have to go to college and accept they aren’t going to be paid a share outside NIL. 

I stated in another thread, idk where this stuff ends. If you believe in a hardline stance that any sports league that generates profits must pay the players - high school football generates billions every year. You have to believe in paying every high school kid too, right?

Edited May 1 by AUght2win

[cole256 17,084]

13 minutes ago, JerryAU said:

If anyone has read into the particulars of the class-action lawsuit House vs NCAA, it is estimated that a settlement will be worked out between both parties, a judge has already hinted that the NCAA (and its member institutions) will be slapped in the face with a +$4Billion lawsuit for backpay to former athletes.  That's a pretty sizeable chunk of money that will be coming out of every NCAA program's pocket to pay former athletes who never got the NIL windfall who want their share of the pie. 

This class-action lawsuit is what has suddenly spurred the NCAA & school presidents to clamor around in Dallas trying to come up with a settlement figure for the backpay to former athletes AND devise a workable plan for the future of college athletics.  

The stubborn old jackasses kicked the can down the road and acted greedy for far too long, then the lawsuits and courts took control and the whole shebang has blown up in their faces. 

 

 

Thank you kind sir

[AUght2win 6,883]

1 hour ago, cole256 said:

Fantastic, all the money being made needs to have eyes on it and needs to be distributed fairly and correctly. There was no reason majority of profits to be going to some old out of shape men who are already wealthy, sitting in a suite watching other people almost kill themselves to make them more money. 

Honest question - do you think college sports has investors? Or Jerry Jones type owners? Like, how do you think the money works? The money goes back into the schools and athletic departments. 

[DAG 34,034]

1 hour ago, JerryAU said:

The stubborn old jackasses kicked the can down the road and acted greedy for far too long, then the lawsuits and courts took control and the whole shebang has blown up in their faces. 

Yep, If they would’ve given up a little bit of the pie I do NOT think things would’ve turned out this way. 

[DAG 34,034]

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40065306/some-bowl-leaders-hope-cba-help-lower-number-opt-outs
 

"If you sign a contract and receive compensation, you're obligated to perform certain duties -- in this case, play 12 regular-season games and a bowl game or a bowl game and the playoff," he said. "That's logical to expect. It's the way the rest of us working folks operate."

[AUght2win 6,883]

31 minutes ago, DAG said:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/40065306/some-bowl-leaders-hope-cba-help-lower-number-opt-outs
 

"If you sign a contract and receive compensation, you're obligated to perform certain duties -- in this case, play 12 regular-season games and a bowl game or a bowl game and the playoff," he said. "That's logical to expect. It's the way the rest of us working folks operate."

Wonder what will happen when a top draft pick fakes an injury to miss a bowl game.