- Jun 30, 2014
- 9,547
- 31,684
Founding Member
Warning: Political Takes So ends college athletics.....
- Thread starter B52G8rAC
- Start date
- Aug 31, 2014
- 1,305
- 1,859
Damn, just reading some of the ruling. Frat boy Kavanaugh was on fire.
“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate, And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different.”
love this little ditty
“All of the restaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’ wages on the theory that 'customers prefer' to eat food from low-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’ salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a 'love of the law.' Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ income in order to create a 'purer' form of helping the sick. News organizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reporters to preserve a 'tradition' of public-minded journalism. Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to camera crews to kindle a 'spirit of amateurism” in Hollywood”
“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate, And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different.”
love this little ditty
“All of the restaurants in a region cannot come together to cut cooks’ wages on the theory that 'customers prefer' to eat food from low-paid cooks. Law firms cannot conspire to cabin lawyers’ salaries in the name of providing legal services out of a 'love of the law.' Hospitals cannot agree to cap nurses’ income in order to create a 'purer' form of helping the sick. News organizations cannot join forces to curtail pay to reporters to preserve a 'tradition' of public-minded journalism. Movie studios cannot collude to slash benefits to camera crews to kindle a 'spirit of amateurism” in Hollywood”
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,419
- 80,070
That still really doesn't apply. As I've said, I've come to terms with the whole thing and definitely ok with the likeness rule(though it will clearly be abused through recruiting regardless of how much they insist otherwise). But the average value of a 4-5 year degree at a school like UF, plus room and board, plus meals and a stipend is probably north of 250k at this point. Did someone like Tebow or Harvin far exceed that, of course. But on that same roster, did guys like Jeremy Brown, Justin Williams, and numerous others bring little tangible value to the table during their 5 year stay? That answer is also yes. Yet, each of them still received the same commitment originally agreed to, even though in retrospect, it was a bad investment.
The problem I have with this argument is the insistence on saying there isn't compensation. Those athletes--and again, not just the stars--absolutely get something of value. So if w want to start delving into "fair market value", why does a school like UF have any obligation to honor a scholarship from a player who disappoints immediately and that they feel is a lost cause? Do we really want a bunch of still 18 year old kids being dropped after one fall camp, or one semester? Especially given the demographic that's largely in question here, do we really think sending them back to rough neighborhoods as a decided failure, and forcing them to either fend for themselves with no education or try landing somewhere else, is a good idea? I personally do not. And that's not even addressing the platform and grooming that are provided to players, often leading to generational wealth type careers. Does the school get anything in return form having them on CBS every other Saturday?
As I said on page two, if that's the direction, they should immediately sue the NFL to change their arbitrary "3 year" rule, and establish a farm/minor league system. Let student athletes who will gladly play for the "love of the game" and a chance to get a free ride to an Masters degree, play college football. And of course, as always, the absolute irony of all of this is that the very ones pushing for this "pay a fair market value" "exploitation" argument will in the same breath whine about the amount of student loan debt in this country. Does a degree at a university have value or doesn't it?
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,577
- 111,214
Founding Member
The issue isn't is there compensation as you put it, I would say a benefit. The issue is do they have the right to further restrict the guy from doing something else in addition to the benefit.
There's really no even slightly colorable legal argument for why they can. Because amateurism. You got nuthin.
Roster limits should be next.
There's really no even slightly colorable legal argument for why they can. Because amateurism. You got nuthin.
Roster limits should be next.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,577
- 111,214
Founding Member
You know they are all frat boys and frat girls right?
lizardbreath
Well-Known Member
- Nov 5, 2016
- 3,341
- 6,323
I couldn't agree more.
- Sep 4, 2014
- 21,419
- 80,070
Well, I don’t disagree on allowing players to do something outside if they want to, even though we all know it is a recipe for major corruption. But again, sure, sell an autograph or drive for Uber, I don’t care.
But the concept of compensation is actually in BK’s statement I quoted and is routinely the crux of this argument. Student athletes “deserve to get paid” because the sport and individual programs are making so much. It implies that they’re truly working for free, which is a farce.
You are correct though that there is no legal argument to justify either. The laws in place are old and very odd in nature. I remember as a kid I was fortunate to be around some of the UF players through family and had dinner out with them sometimes. All fine. But when the check came, a family friend who arranged the dinners could pay, but my dad couldn’t. If a low level booster buys a plate of red beans and rice at Harry’s for a current student athlete the whole system apparently implodes.
I’m just not a fan of the change to a more business approach and don’t think much of what they’re proposing has been well thought out. There will significant negatives that come along with it. So I still think all parties would be better served parting ways entirely. Want to go to college on a full ride, great. Think that’s a waste of time, fine, there’s a route for you as well.
Last edited:
- Jun 12, 2014
- 9,695
- 26,066
Founding Member
- Aug 11, 2015
- 8,345
- 16,021
A few years ago UF advertised that the average sum of scholarships and benefits to football players was $350,000. Does that not count as “compensation?”
- Sep 23, 2017
- 2,689
- 4,130
It could be. However, why restrict an athlete, or anyone on scholarship, from cashing in on their OWN likeness, name or celebrity?
For instance lets say you have a beloved Professor at a school and he opens a Strip Club with his name and likeness attached. Yes he made his celebrity through the school and access to the university community. He can promote the business all he wants. NOW he can hire the gymnastics, volleyball and swimming athletes to come and perform and they can sell their ”likeness” all they want. It’s really that simple.
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,577
- 111,214
Founding Member
and there is already major corruption. we are just getting penalized for not being among them.
This has nothing to do with a salary or employee status for football players.
The issue is very narrow and the rest is what is called dictum.
EDIT: You guys forced me to skim the ruling. The court even says DIRECTLY that it isnt limiting the NCAA's ability to limit player benefits from the university. (Lower court left in limits on benefits and cash awards to the players) Unsatisfied with this result, the NCAA asks us to reverse to the extent the lower courts sided with the student athletes. .... (pg 14 of the opinion).
(Section II-A pg 15 of the opinion)
With all these matters taken as given, we express no views on them. Instead, we focus only on the objections the NCAA does raise. Principally, it suggests that the lower courts erred by subjecting its compensation restrictions to a rule of reason analysis. (Technical arguments regarding the rule being applied and standard of review). Then they give numerous examples of how the trial court allowed NCAA to limit benefits received by students from the school.
/end of edit
The fact that they say employers could not do that to employees has nothing to do with employee status for football players. they just use that as an example to show how farcical concept was. They could have just as easily used consumers or shoppers for the example, to prove the rationale is not legal but since that would be a different type of antitrust violation the employee example made more sense.
The case was about the stupid limitations controlling football players 24/7/ 365. Period. There just was no justification for not allowing them to work outside.
The world hasn't ended because all the other students in the university can have an outside job. or that they can transfer for that matter (obviously another issue that's not before the court).
This is actually going to help us a bunch. as it is our ghetto ass administration pays about half the stipend for the players that other universities pack. allowing them to work jobs, sell likeness, sign autographs, have a YouTube channel with their rapping, whatever means that there won't be as bad of a discrepancy between the life of an Alabama player in the life of a Florida player at least a good ones.
The related issues of player transfers is also helpful to us. it's getting harder for the elite teams to stack up talent, without some of those guys transferring out when they lose the starting job. it sucks that we're dumpster divers but I guess it meets being 2 Star U under Butters.
I will say this though. If a university starts paying their players, the courts would not likely allow the NCAA to prohibit it.
Again those are two more distinct different issues.
The days of the NCAA making any incredibly arbitrary and amazingly intrustive rules are over. And it is long past due.
Last edited:
- Oct 15, 2018
- 6,085
- 16,195
So...will internships be a thing of the past now? That's what college football is at its core. Do students who participate in research for the university that is the universities intellectual property get paid now? If a player decides to cash in on his likeness, how much of that cut does the university get? I would think the university should be able to get all the money that the scholarship covers, right? The room and board. The food. The price for the gym, stadium and facilities utilities?
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,577
- 111,214
Founding Member
Of course not. What planet are you on? Some of you are such drama queens. The NCAA doesn't limit staffs or interns. Or research assistants. Or grad students. Nothing in the opinion says that all football players are employees or that every student in any capacity with the football program is an employee... and certainly not that anyone who does anything with university (specifically research) is an employee.
The issue was can the NCAA ban student athletes from receiving compensation for outside work. The court said no. (Nontechnical answer. Technical answer goes more into whether the District Court properly applied the correct standards and whether the trial court's assessment of the evidence was reasonable etc.)
From the opinion, summarizing the trial court's decision (actually an injunction):
"The court then entered an injunction reflecting its findings and conclusions. Nothing in the order precluded the NCAA from continuing to fix compensation and benefits unrelated to education; limits on athletic scholarships, for example, remained untouched. The court enjoined the NCAA only from limiting education-related compensation or benefits that conferences and schools may provide to student athletes playing Division I football and basketball.
"The court’s injunction further specified that the NCAA could continue to limit
cash awards for academic achievement—but only so long as those limits are no lower than the cash awards allowed for athletic achievement (currently $5,980 annually). The court added that the NCAA
and its members were free to propose a definition of compensation or benefits “‘related to education.’” And the court explained that the NCAA was free to regulate how conferences and schools provide education-related compensation and benefits. Ibid. The court further emphasized that its injunction applied only to the NCAA and multi-conference agreements—thus allowing individual conferences (and the schools that constitute them) to impose tighter restrictions
if they wish. Id., at 169a, ¶6. The district court’s injunction issued in March 2019, and took effect in August 2020.
"Both sides appealed....
"For their part, the student-athletes do not renew their across-the-board challenge to the NCAA’s compensation restrictions. Accordingly, we do not pass on the rules that remain in place or the district court’s judgment upholding them. Our review is confined to those restrictions now enjoined.
(citations omitted for easier reading) but we are mostly on page 14 https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-512_gfbh.pdf
Summarized by a drunken donkey:
ALL THOSE BENEFIT LIMITATIONS REMAIN IN PLACE.
Now... where is my rum???
Last edited:
- Oct 15, 2018
- 6,085
- 16,195
Ok...but when you consider the NFL as a profession and you look at College Football as the main pipeline that educates/trains students to become professionals, how does one not look at College Football as "unrelated to education"? It is THE educational process to become a professional football player.
That was the point I was trying to make.
That was the point I was trying to make.
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,836
- 7,256
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,836
- 7,256
- Oct 15, 2018
- 6,085
- 16,195
Irrelevant. Next.
- Jan 3, 2018
- 4,836
- 7,256
So do you consider all college athletics as an "educational" avenue for other professional sports?
- Jun 9, 2014
- 78,577
- 111,214
Founding Member
Im really not exactly clear what points you guys are trying to make, or why you are trying to make it.
Last edited:
- Oct 15, 2018
- 6,085
- 16,195
Do these other professional sports look to colleges as the primary means to fill their vacancies and positions?
Me either to be honest. Im not sure if I am against it or for it. I just don't think we should act like the real education that the majority of the football athletes are really after isnt the education on the field. Especially those in the population that this is relevant towards: the ones that will actually make money from their likeness.
Im not against it, because I am sure the university is making money for a video game to use their uniform so it makes sense that the athlete can make money for their name, but lets not act like these athletes would even get the opportunity if the university didnt give them the chance. Think of all the money invested in the stadiums, facilities (I know) and so on. Sure would be nice to be totally honest on the situation as well.
