NCAA

[TimmySmith 2,782]

If a kid is using his scholarship to make money then it's not a stretch to tax it.  

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

Just now, TimmySmith said:

If a kid is using his scholarship to make money then it's not a stretch to tax it.  

Could students then demand schools to offer them insurance and workers comp then as well?

[bostonlager 2,464]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Right at this moment it's Ohio State.  What would make Ronnie choose Iowa over Ohio State right now if he knew he's never be able to sell those shirts during college?  Most likely, not a damn thing would have changed because Ohio State is still the higher profile college and sets him up for a better chance to make money off his name after he moves on from college.

Right now Iowa would at least have a shot to sign him. I forgot to mention Ronnie grew up a die hard Hawkeye fan, but when push comes to shove money talks. Ohio State is always going to have a better program than Iowa because booster money goes directly into the football program where money is spent on facilities. When Ohio State is able to launder money from boosters directly to the athletes the gap between the Hawkeyes and Buckeyes is going to increase greatly. 

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

Just now, bostonlager said:

Right now Iowa would at least have a shot to sign him. I forgot to mention Ronnie grew up a die hard Hawkeye fan, but when push comes to shove money talks. Ohio State is always going to have a better program than Iowa because booster money goes directly into the football program where money is spent on facilities. When Ohio State is able to launder money from boosters directly to the athletes the gap between the Hawkeyes and Buckeyes is going to increase greatly. 

Nice hypothetical.  In my hypothetical Iowa is ranked number 1 in the nation in a couple years and Ohio State just had their football program shut down because the entire football staff was sodomizing it's players.

Like I said before, we don't know what's going to happen.  It's all speculation and hypothetical right now.

[bostonlager 2,464]

Just now, Hawkeye21 said:

Nice hypothetical.  In my hypothetical Iowa is ranked number 1 in the nation in a couple years and Ohio State just had their football program shut down because the entire football staff was sodomizing it's players.

Like I said before, we don't know what's going to happen.  It's all speculation and hypothetical right now.

My thetical has a chance of becoming reality. Yours is a fairytale regardless of what rule changes take place. 

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

2 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

My thetical has a chance of becoming reality. Yours is a fairytale regardless of what rule changes take place. 

I have realistic ones too but it's pointless right now because we don't know what will happen.  Iowa has a lot of big time boosters.  Do they have more than Ohio State?  I don't know and I can't imagine you know either.

[bostonlager 2,464]

Here is a pretty good article highlighting my point using Duke basketball as an example. 

https://balldurham.com/2019/10/29/ncaa-ruling-duke-basketball-reigns/

[bostonlager 2,464]

Just now, Hawkeye21 said:

I have realistic ones too but it's pointless right now because we don't know what will happen.  Iowa has a lot of big time boosters.  Do they have more than Ohio State?  I don't know and I can't imagine you know either.

If Iowa boosters cared about football the way Ohio State boosters do they would be competing for a B1G title every year. 

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

Just now, bostonlager said:

If Iowa boosters cared about football the way Ohio State boosters do they would be competing for a B1G title every year. 

Iowa doesn't run their program like that.  I'm sure you won't agree though.

[bostonlager 2,464]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Iowa doesn't run their program like that.  I'm sure you won't agree though.

And they won't run it the same way under the new set of rules. The gap between Iowa and Ohio State is going to grow. 

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

Just now, bostonlager said:

And they won't run it the same way under the new set of rules. The gap between Iowa and Ohio State is going to grow. 

That's certainly possible.  Don't forget that OSU still has to compete with other schools that are like them when signing these players.  They can also only have so many players on a team and at each position.  Kids also care about playing time as well.  It's not going to be all about money for all of these players.

[bostonlager 2,464]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

That's certainly possible.  Don't forget that OSU still has to compete with other schools that are like them when signing these players.  They can also only have so many players on a team and at each position.  Kids also care about playing time as well.  It's not going to be all about money for all of these players.

Just like it is now, but the money is only going to sweeten the pot for the schools that can and are willing to shell out the money. 

This should also shine a light on these new transfer rules with players not having to sit out a year if they enter the portal by a certain time. Let's be honest, no one wants Nate Stanley and most would likely pay him to stay at Iowa, but let's pretend he is actually worth a fock. Ryan Day calls him up and says, "Hey Nate I know you had goals of finishing in the middle of the pack of the B1G this year, but how would you like $100,000 in a duffel bag and start for the Buckeyes? I'm not going to you the money personally, but Jim owns a dealership here in Columbus and is going to slap your face on the front door and will give you the money." 

If small schools luck out and their 3 star recruit ends up being a star player the big schools are simply going to swoop in and steal them. 

[Hawkeye21 1,854]

2 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

Just like it is now, but the money is only going to sweeten the pot for the schools that can and are willing to shell out the money. 

This should also shine a light on these new transfer rules with players not having to sit out a year if they enter the portal by a certain time. Let's be honest, no one wants Nate Stanley and most would likely pay him to stay at Iowa, but let's pretend he is actually worth a fock. Ryan Day calls him up and says, "Hey Nate I know you had goals of finishing in the middle of the pack of the B1G this year, but how would you like $100,000 in a duffel bag and start for the Buckeyes? I'm not going to you the money personally, but Jim owns a dealership here in Columbus and is going to slap your face on the front door and will give you the money." 

If small schools luck out and their 3 star recruit ends up being a star player the big schools are simply going to swoop in and steal them. 

That's possible.

[bostonlager 2,464]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

That's possible.

Which means the gap between the haves and have nots is going to grow and grow and grow some more. The school that will end up benefiting from this more than anyone is Notre Dame. They have the Pope's money and are the only school with their own TV contract. 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

4 hours ago, bostonlager said:

I am aware that it is already going on, but if you give the okay for it to happen out in the open it is going to further separate the haves from the have nots in college football and basketball. The hawkeyes will go from winning a B1G title once every 20 years to never winning one again because they cannot outspend the Ohio States and Michingans of the world. 

Maybe a super rich person, at a non-powerhouse university, could buy talent to make their Alma Mater relevant.

 

 

[bostonlager 2,464]

6 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Maybe a super rich person, at a non-powerhouse university, could buy talent to make their Alma Mater relevant.

 

 

It is possible. Ladanian Tomlinson went to TCU when they were in the roast beef conference. Alabama, Ohio State etc already have an advantage due to facilities, tradition, and the "want" to win. Being able to launder money from boosters to players adds another level of advantage for them. Your example above would take T. Boone Pickens money if you're expecting someone to build an SMU like powerhouse. 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

22 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

It is possible. Ladanian Tomlinson went to TCU when they were in the roast beef conference. Alabama, Ohio State etc already have an advantage due to facilities, tradition, and the "want" to win. Being able to launder money from boosters to players adds another level of advantage for them. Your example above would take T. Boone Pickens money if you're expecting someone to build an SMU like powerhouse. 

Mark Cuban could make Pitt relevant

Stanford might be relevant again

[bostonlager 2,464]

3 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

Mark Cuban could make Pitt relevant

Stanford might be relevant again

Both of those could happen, but it would take the "want to." 

Ohio State, Alabama, etc already have boosters that want to win. The idea that a middle of the road type team or bottom tier team in a major conference is going to all of sudden be a relevant powerhouse because money can be laundered to players is wishful thinking. Yesterday's news is going to create a much bigger gap between the big boys and those that play in the Craftsman Lawnmower Bowl on December 27th. 

[Alias Detective 1,179]

20 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

Both of those could happen, but it would take the "want to." 

Ohio State, Alabama, etc already have boosters that want to win. The idea that a middle of the road type team or bottom tier team in a major conference is going to all of sudden be a relevant powerhouse because money can be laundered to players is wishful thinking. Yesterday's news is going to create a much bigger gap between the big boys and those that play in the Craftsman Lawnmower Bowl on December 27th. 

We shall see.  It can go both ways but there is zero parody in college athletics right now.

[bostonlager 2,464]

2 minutes ago, Alias Detective said:

We shall see.  It can go both ways but there is zero parody in college athletics right now.

Don't get me wrong - There could be a school that has a rich donor or a handful of rich donors that go balls to the wall with the new rule and make a middle of the road school a new powerhouse, but that will be the exception, not the rule. For the most part you are going to see Your Iowas, Purdues, Missouris, and other T-Mobile Payphone Bowl game schools get closer competitively to Ball State than Ohio State. 

We have already seen this scenario play out and continue to do so in Major League Baseball. The teams/schools with more money and desire to win are going to do so on a more consistent basis. And when a middle of the road school hits the jackpot with a star player the big boys are going to swoop in and buy him just like the Yankees. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

5 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

II get why some share your opinion but I feel it's incorrect.  If athletes get paid for their likeness they are not being paid by the school and they are not an employee of that school.  To me it's no different than any other student that has a job or is finding a way to make money outside of school.

To note, I'm not advocating taxing them, I just understand the "a" reason... it may not necessarily be the Senator's reasoning.  That said, it's different because NCAA athletics are and qualify as "amateur" sports.  Someone who's making money off of that sport, is technically no longer an amateur while a person with another job, is just working a random job that is not at all associated with that sport.  

 

Quote

Scholarships are there for colleges to get kids to come to their school.  Scholarships not only benefit the student but it also benefits the college.  Colleges are competing against each other to get the top students in the world, whether they be athletes or not.  Let's not pretend that the students are the only ones benefiting here.

Agreed.  I don't know what the issue here is.  Students get to go to college for free or at a reduced cost (via scholarship), in return, the school hopes that the education they received paid off.  It's an investment.  Not sure how this is an issue.  Student gets an education... school gets a reputation.  Win/win as I see it.  What does anyone being an athlete or not have to do with it?

 

Quote

If you start taxing the scholarships of athletes I think you'd have to tax all scholarships to all students.  Once you do that you are basically admitting that you are paying those students like employees to be at your school and therefore you should treat them like employees.  You should be offering them insurance and workers comp if they get injured while performing/working for you.  Are they prepared for all of that, because that's what the argument will turn into.

No, not all scholarships are made equal.  Student athletes on scholarship as well as other scholarship student who make money, are working for it on their own.  In some cases, as in "unpaid" internships, the students are working for free.  In other cases, students are actually working and providing a service in return for cash... it's no different than anyone in else in the country.  Student athletes who are making money off the "athlete" aspect of it, are in a sense, double dipping.  They're already getting the education for free, that's the return for getting to play on national tv... now, they want to get paid again, for no real service at all.  Sure, you can say that making 2 commercials, or showing up at a bowling alley 3 times, or whatever is work, but 20 hours of your time over 4 months isn't the same as 20 hours per week for 20 weeks of labor.  Now, you can certainly say that actors, actresses, singers, and other athletes in the country aren't working 40+ hours a week for 52 weeks a year... and that's true.  You know what's also true about that?  None of them are getting money from the government.

 

In my opinion, I think that anyone who takes money for playing a sport, should have to pay back 100% of all scholarship money and exempt from any future scholarships.  So, if a student wants to take $100k from Bob Auto Mall, then he can't have any scholarships... ever.  If he currently is on one, he must forfeit that scholarship and reimburse the school 100% for all expenses.  You're either a "student/student athlete" or an "athlete", you can't be both.