NCAA: Pay-for-Play not coming

[thebigabd]

Which athlete is bringing in 700,000,000?

And again, if I signe a contract knowing I wouldn't be getting paid extra for performance and I didn't like it I would suck it up or quit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you had a skill that other people do not have, and are generating huge profits for your company, you would be an absolute idiot to not demand more money. If you leave, they are screwed.

 

[snydrosooner]

If you had a skill that other people do not have, and are generating huge profits for your company, you would be an absolute idiot to not demand more money. If you leave, they are screwed.

I agree. But not 1 player is bringing in 700,000,000 dollars. How do you decide who brings in what and how much they deserve to get? Does Manziel deserve more then any other starter? What about former players that added to the tradition and legacy at A&M? Just because a capital campaign begain under manziel, didn't former players add to the name brand that alows for money to be raised today? What about the walk on the pays his own way but is still part of the team? Dosn't a walk on play everygame for TA&M or have they stopped the 12th man tradition . Does the walk on deserve payment if he sees the field?

What about east popcorn state that OU plays. Do there players get the same amount as OU. OU players are the names, but without East popcorn state they may not have a game that week and be on TV.

My Point is it would be diffcult to divide out that money. Just like a business.

Did one employee really bring in 700,000,000 dollars to the company or was it a team, was it the fact that the company had been around for 100 years and a good reputation help seal the deal? Didn't previous employess help with that? All of that plays a factor in business decisions,.

 

[WTSooner]

If you had a skill that other people do not have, and are generating huge profits for your company, you would be an absolute idiot to not demand more money. If you leave, they are screwed.

The fact that you keep insinuating that Manziel is resposible for all that money is beyond nuts. Please stop.

OU has had surges like that when we had big fund raising events for the stadium or whatever too. It wasn't due to, say, Bradford being on the roster at the time. aTm launched a HUGE fundraising campaign, likely before Johnny F'ing Football ever took a snap in a game for aTm. That stadium fund raising, along with the move to the SEC, has 1 billion times more to do with the increase in "revenues" than does JM. To suggest otherwise is silly. So stop saying something that isn't true.

 

[DenverSooner]

They can't go pro. You have to be three years removed from high school to be in the NFL.

That is an NFL rule not a college rule.

 

[DenverSooner]

Lol what is your profession? My boss is a billionaire. It happens everywhere.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is your boss truly a billionaire? That is an insane amount of money. I once knew a guy that told me you were not rich unless you had $500,000,000. I always thought he had $500,000,000 but I really didn't now.

 

[sperry]

Basically, players should be able to go pro whenever they want. Because right now, elite basketball and football players are forced to go to college, and football players are forced to stay, in order to pursue their chosen vocation. Due to the monopolies held by the professional sports leagues, there is really no alternative to attending college for the required period of time.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If you had a skill that other people do not have, and are generating huge profits for your company, you would be an absolute idiot to not demand more money. If you leave, they are screwed.

This is irrelevant


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NickZepp]

Basically, players should be able to go pro whenever they want. Because right now, elite basketball and football players are forced to go to college, and football players are forced to stay, in order to pursue their chosen vocation. Due to the monopolies held by the professional sports leagues, there is really no alternative to attending college for the required period of time.

See I disagree here. If a profession or those running it decide education or experience of some kind is needed, I have no problem with that. If the NFL or NBA have age or experience limits there is nothing wrong with it. Anymore than saying you have to have X amount of experience to be a doctor.

What MLB has over the NFL and NBA is a great minor league system that can train someone years.

Sent from my galaxy s2

 

[WTSooner]

See I disagree here. If a profession or those running it decide education or experience of some kind is needed, I have no problem with that. If the NFL or NBA have age or experience limits there is nothing wrong with it. Anymore than saying you have to have X amount of experience to be a doctor.

What MLB has over the NFL and NBA is a great minor league system that can train someone years.

Sent from my galaxy s2

Agreed.

I think the NBA needs to keep pushing their D League, then maybe at some point they can open the draft back up to anybody.

The NFL is trickier. I don't know many 18 year olds, or 19 year olds, that belong on an NFL roster for a 16-17 game schedule. But a minor league system doesn't really make sense either. Maybe something like the NBA's D League would work. Or maybe a rule about them being draftable, and stashed on the practice squad for the first 2 years. But what kid is going to want that? And what team is going to want to pay a kid first round money to sit on the bench for 2 years.

There is no easy answer, but doing anything more than slightly increasing the current scholarships these college folks get is probably the wrong answer.

 

[DenverSooner]

See I disagree here. If a profession or those running it decide education or experience of some kind is needed, I have no problem with that. If the NFL or NBA have age or experience limits there is nothing wrong with it. Anymore than saying you have to have X amount of experience to be a doctor.

What MLB has over the NFL and NBA is a great minor league system that can train someone years.

Sent from my galaxy s2

This is an excellent point. Nobody contends that doctors, lawyers, CPAs, etc. should be able to be professionals whenever they want.

 

[DenverSooner]

Agreed.

I think the NBA needs to keep pushing their D League, then maybe at some point they can open the draft back up to anybody.

The NFL is trickier. I don't know many 18 year olds, or 19 year olds, that belong on an NFL roster for a 16-17 game schedule. But a minor league system doesn't really make sense either. Maybe something like the NBA's D League would work. Or maybe a rule about them being draftable, and stashed on the practice squad for the first 2 years. But what kid is going to want that? And what team is going to want to pay a kid first round money to sit on the bench for 2 years.

There is no easy answer, but doing anything more than slightly increasing the current scholarships these college folks get is probably the wrong answer.

They don't pay first round money for being on the practice squad. Those guys make good money but substantially less than the rest of the team. I seriously doubt an NFL team would ever use a first round pick on a high school kid even if it were allowed. No way they take high school QBs.

 

[WTSooner]

They don't pay first round money for being on the practice squad. Those guys make good money but substantially less than the rest of the team. I seriously doubt an NFL team would ever use a first round pick on a high school kid even if it were allowed. No way they take high school QBs.

You missed my point.

If the NFL instituted a rule that HS kids, or freshmen in college could be drafted, but they had to "sit out" a year or two, that wouldn't really work for the reason I mentioned. I don't see NFL owners wanting to draft a talented kid early, and pay him early money, if they would have to be stashed on the PQ for a season or two. So the model I was talking about, wouldn't really work. Those players would still get paid 1st, or 2nd round money. Just b/c they were drafted early, but stashed on the PQ, there is no way the Player's Union would allow them to not be paid that 1st or 2nd round money.

 

[NickZepp]

Agreed.

I think the NBA needs to keep pushing their D League, then maybe at some point they can open the draft back up to anybody.

The NFL is trickier. I don't know many 18 year olds, or 19 year olds, that belong on an NFL roster for a 16-17 game schedule. But a minor league system doesn't really make sense either. Maybe something like the NBA's D League would work. Or maybe a rule about them being draftable, and stashed on the practice squad for the first 2 years. But what kid is going to want that? And what team is going to want to pay a kid first round money to sit on the bench for 2 years.

There is no easy answer, but doing anything more than slightly increasing the current scholarships these college folks get is probably the wrong answer.

Football is a different animal. The NBADL has made strides in recent years to be a halfway decent minor league system. Still not where it could be but it has made strides. Football costs lot more to put out there. It would be an interesting concept to have pro teams endorsed by the NFL in cities like well OKC for example to have a minor league system. But it costs a lot of money to put it out there and probably wouldn't have a chance of really making that much money. Most other minor league or start up football leagues in the past outside of the American Football League in the 60s have gone under.

 

[thebigabd]

So Oregon players get paid from Nike? You really don't see a problem with this?

I think you are missing the point here.

I am arguing that athletes should be able to use their own fame to profit off themselves. Not that Nike or even the school should sign them up to some kind of contract (other than the scholarship) to come play for the school.

In my example: Famous player can do commercials, sign a deal with Nike, charge money for autographs, do events at a local car dealership for money, etc.

In your example: University of Oregon goes out all over the nation and pays high school kids and/or their families in exchange for them agreeing to play for Oregon.

In my example, the players can be entrepreneurs of sorts. In your example, they get their pockets lined to attend a school.

 

[WTSooner]

I think you are missing the point here.

I am arguing that athletes should be able to use their own fame to profit off themselves. Not that Nike or even the school should sign them up to some kind of contract (other than the scholarship) to come play for the school.

In my example: Famous player can do commercials, sign a deal with Nike, charge money for autographs, do events at a local car dealership for money, etc.

In your example: University of Oregon goes out all over the nation and pays high school kids and/or their families in exchange for them agreeing to play for Oregon.

In my example, the players can be entrepreneurs of sorts. In your example, they get their pockets lined to attend a school.

You don't see the potential problems there?

Oregon: "Hey 5* QB, come to Oregon, and Nike will pay you $1M to be in commercials, and to sign x amount of memorabilia."

smh

 

[thebigabd]

You don't see the potential problems there?

Oregon: "Hey 5* QB, come to Oregon, and Nike will pay you $1M to be in commercials, and to sign x amount of memorabilia."

smh

Sure, they could try that. But companies/rich people typically only invest money in things that give them a return. Rich people are generally rich because they don't just throw million of dollars of away on items which give them no return.

Investing that kind of money in high school kids is risky business. Every year, there are plenty of 5* talents that are total busts. So, where is the return? It's a high risk, relatively low reward situation in that example. There are other things to consider with paying high school players, such as marketability. Most of the time a tiny percent of the population has even heard of this person. Not very smart to invest in someone who is unproven, unknown, etc... When Sam Bradford was in high school, the only people who knew who Sam Bradford was were a very small percentage of Oklahomans and random people who saw him on Rivals. We are talking about 0.00001% of the population. Who would invest in this guy? Nobody would.

Professional athletes and even college athletes are a much lower risk and a much higher return for that kind of thing. They have already proven themselves, they are already famous, well known in the national media, etc.

Johnny Manziel wouldn't have made anything coming out of high school. He only became "famous" after he established himself at A&M. He was a 3* recruit with nothing but A&M and mid-major offers (per rivals).

I don't think this would be an issue, in the way you are describing. The people who would be making money would be people who are already established, famous, college athletes.

 

[Soonerman]

This sounds like something I would sell to my slaves if I were a cotton plantation owner in Mississippi in the 1700's.

"In exchange for you working on my farm for no money, I will provide you the following:
-Free room and board
-Free food
-Free healthcare
.......

And then I will have zero labor costs and sell my product for maximum profit! Who's with me!"
-Calvin Candie

Christ almighty. :facepalm

 

[WTSooner]

Sure, they could try that. But companies/rich people typically only invest money in things that give them a return. Rich people are generally rich because they don't just throw million of dollars of away on items which give them no return.

Seriously?

Rich boosters give kids money all the time to come to their school. How would this be any different? The "return" is they want to see their school's football team win a bunch of games.

 

[KChoops]

Sure, they could try that. But companies/rich people typically only invest money in things that give them a return. Rich people are generally rich because they don't just throw million of dollars of away on items which give them no return.

Investing that kind of money in high school kids is risky business. Every year, there are plenty of 5* talents that are total busts. So, where is the return? It's a high risk, relatively low reward situation in that example. There are other things to consider with paying high school players, such as marketability. Most of the time a tiny percent of the population has even heard of this person. Not very smart to invest in someone who is unproven, unknown, etc... When Sam Bradford was in high school, the only people who knew who Sam Bradford was were a very small percentage of Oklahomans and random people who saw him on Rivals. We are talking about 0.00001% of the population. Who would invest in this guy? Nobody would.

Professional athletes and even college athletes are a much lower risk and a much higher return for that kind of thing. They have already proven themselves, they are already famous, well known in the national media, etc.

Johnny Manziel wouldn't have made anything coming out of high school. He only became "famous" after he established himself at A&M. He was a 3* recruit with nothing but A&M and mid-major offers (per rivals).

I don't think this would be an issue, in the way you are describing. The people who would be making money would be people who are already established, famous, college athletes.

I don't see it working out this way and would create a ton of new problems or at least shifting the problem somewhere else.

If a high school player can get paid for their likeness and still go to college all you would see is colleges establishing 'companies' (ie.. slush funds) to pay players to go to their college. When auburn (and the other SEC schools who tried) where paying newton they didn't care about there profit from just him. They, as have boosters always done, look at what it brings to the football team. They bought a championship not a player. Boosters slipping college athletes money has always been basically a donation to their university's potential success. Allowing them the open method to do it would just create a bigger problem. It would start a bidding war and would not just go to the 5 stars. It would trickle down to a point there where collegess would be forced to basically have a year slush fund budget on what kids they would buy. How much do you think Peterson or Broyles would have fetched when they went back and forth between OU/OSU?

And i would hate to see what this would do to highschool kids. If kids(and parents) know they can make a ton of money by making themselves well known for a commercial contract you just turn high school into the same thing college is. A tryout. Its just shifting the problem.

 

[sperry]

This is an excellent point. Nobody contends that doctors, lawyers, CPAs, etc. should be able to be professionals whenever they want.

The sanctioned regulation, licensing and oversight of these professions (which IMO, works out quite poorly), has some justification because of the consequences of employing an incompetent doctor or lawyer. No one is going to die, or end up in prison, because a kid jumped to the league straight out of high school.


There's also the fact that there is nothing preventing law students, med students, or accounting students from being compensated to endorse products or capitalize on their own good will or personal brand. Paying students for practicing law, medicine etc. isn't an apt comparison because the justification for now allowing pay in those circumstances is the public health and wellbeing. The "justification" for not paying collegiate athletes is maintaining the ideals of amateurism, which is a complete farce when you consider the business of big time CFB and CBB.