Eleven Dubcast: Stanford's Women's Field Hockey Championship is the Price Mark Emmert is Willing to Pay

Comments Show All Comments

43201Indianola's picture

If this bill passes in California will it start the end of the road for the NCAA?  Wouldn't it just open the doors for other states to follow suite?  It seems like this is a scare tactic...

I mean what would happen if half the PAC 12 schools who reside in California are banned by the NCAA?  

Top of the food chain

HS
Sunny Buck's picture

Well, worst case scenario would be for Cali and the NCAA to stand firm against each other. Cali schools would no longer be eligible for championships or possibly be ineligible for other NCAA promotional perks. This is a huge, steep slippery slope that could change college football like nothing else before.

I'm not trying to win a popularity contest. I'm trying to win football games-- Woody Hayes

HS
Nick's picture

Willing to bet most states don't want college athletes to be state employees

HS
BuckeyeJAK's picture

This would have a huge impact on recruiting

Mark May is a mental midget

HS
Buckfrombirth's picture

That was my first thought as well. It would change everything, and the 2nd and 3rd order effects are hardly well understood by anyone on either side of the pay-players debate. Count me in the undecided crowd, for now.

I survived Cooper, and I hate Tai Streets.

HS
kmp10's picture

Exactly, JAK. You cannot have schools that coexist within the same organization, i.e., the NCAA, following two different standards, especially when the standard at issue is amateurism. If UCLA, as an example, is allowed pay its football players while simultaneously being recognized as an NCAA institution, then that is the very definition of 'unfair advantage.' All of the people on here who pine away for players to be paid are by extension advocating for the end of college football, while at the same time refusing to recognize that all players on scholarship are already being handsomely paid via free education, medical care, housing, meals, travel, accommodations, monthly scholarship checks, bowl gifts, clothing, personal training... and most importantly, they leave college debt free. In case you've yet to hear, debilitating student loan debt is one of the top issues facing presidential nominees this election cycle. The LAST people we should be concerned about specific to fairness and affordability of their college experience are the scholarship athletes. Lawmakers in California would be FAR better served introducing legislation aimed at making college infinitely more affordable for the non-scholarship students, or the vast majority of the people attending their universities. Paying college football players in addition to what they already receive is akin to awarding the Super Bowl MVP a new Corvette. Why give a guy who makes multiple millions per season a new car? You wanna give away a new Vette and get recognized for doing it? How about giving one to the military veteran who returned from the middle east with one less arm and half his face after being blown up while protecting our freedoms. You want to worry about fairness and equity? How about making certain every American taxpayer has top-notch, affordable healthcare before concerning yourselves with the guy going to college for free, getting healthcare for free, housing for free, food for free...

When I die, sprinkle my ashes over the 70's 

HS
PiedmontBuck's picture

I totally agree. Then how would the players get paid?  Equally or do starters get more?  Would their compensation equal the cost of all the food, healthcare, etc?  I think that would cause a whole new set of issues.  I think paying athletes is a bad idea!!

HS
Go1Bucks's picture

This! ^^^ KMP100xOver.

Go Buckeyes!

HS
GrayDay's picture

If the payments are limited to something for the just use of names, number, and likenesses one could see a deal allowing that.  That aspects has always seemed to have the best argument going for it - i.e, not paying for their play technically, but for their likeness.  Could a school right now legally use the likeness of any other kind of celebrity student without paying them?  But everyone in the NCAA would have to sign on for the same deal or there would be huge recruiting advantages created.  Even if you could reach a deal on that, the strong programs would walk away even further from the small ones.

Have to agree with Emmert that if states go on their own about this, they are the ones leaving the NCAA.  There can really be no way you allow schools in certain states to do it and not others.  The only deal that works is an NCAA wide one.  And even then, its a slippery slope to the end of college football.

HS
Rocket Man's picture

We've gone a far way from suspensions and forfeits and show-cause because players traded their own gold pants for tattoos a few years ago, to now paying players for their likeness.

The world is spinning rapidly.

Varys: I've always hated the bells. They ring for horror, a dead king, a city under siege. 
Tyrion: A wedding. 
Varys: Exactly.

HS
Nick's picture

IMO you can't have that setup. Players would have to earn money on their own without use of school copyrights or likeness like any other student at the school could do. Schools / conferences shouldn't be involved in it at all. If a player can, on their own accord, make money off their image or skills through selling merchandise or creating content then let them do it. 

HS
vedwin's picture

The dinosaurs that run the NCAA must be high on their own supply of bullshit if they think threatening a state government on this topic is going to work out well for them.

HS
allinosu's picture

They aren't threatening them because the state can do what they want but the NCAA (which is the colleges themselves) can do as they please also. An athlete can accept all the money they want but the NCAA determines what it accepts as amateurism. 

HS
stantmann's picture

The NCAA might just force a minor league for football and basketball. Not saying that is a bad thing, just that it will happen if they ban the states as a whole. I prefer to keep it unpaid, and if they get paid, it goes in Trust until their playing days are over.

"When you're part of a team, you stand up for your teammates. Your loyalty is to them. You protect them through good and bad, because they'd do the same for you." Yogi Berra

HS
Nick's picture

Putting it in a trust is unrealistic and probably illegal

HS
covey2's picture

Let's be honest these kids are going to be given a choice... a CHANCE for a championship, or get paid to play for a few years!!! I see that as an easy decision for an 18 year old. All the best players will be offered by cali schools and they know they will get paid so everyone else is left with the scraps.

HS
ashtabulassassin's picture

true

Buckshots... always there for you if you missed the news last month

HS
teddyballgame's picture

NCAA has dragged their feet on this issue forever but I'd rather they implement a broad solution rather than have each state do their own thing.

HS
ashtabulassassin's picture

11w is too preachy on the subject of paid student athletes. As if it was a forgone conclusion that their opinion on the subject is right. In reality, its a really stupid thing to do. Might sound good if you want to virtue signal and act like this is robbing the rich to give to the poor, but just like robbing the rich and giving to the poor doesn't in work in the real world, paying student athletes doesn't work either.

The sport (cfp or ncaam) is popular and has tons of money because the sport isn't about money to the same level as the NFL. Once that changes the whole dynamics of the game change. Who goes where becomes more about money, even less about the school, and you end up with a crappy version of pro sports. I for one am not interested in CFB once it becomes just another pro sport or some bad version of it. Its nice to have a high quality game that isn't just about the money. 

also, in reality the amount of schools which can pay student athletes more is very small. So the disparity will wipe out tons of school's programs and in the end there will be less total money going to students. 

You can never rob the rich and give to the poor. It doesn't work. The rich create more value per dollar given which optimizes the allocation of society's money. In other words the best total outcome is the one the one we have in the USA.... where the rich are constantly raising the standard of living of the poor by making laptops, phones, and safer cars cheaper all the time. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Henry Ford, etc. all make the world better for everyone. All the money that flows into college sports has the same effect, the resources, training, and medical care that today's student athletes get is world's ahead of what it was just 20years ago... 

Buckshots... always there for you if you missed the news last month

HS
Nick's picture

I wouldn't even argue in this direction. Most of these programs aren't rich, most don't even make money. Many rely on student fees to pay for the programs. The money the big programs make go to the other sports that don't make money and to giving athletes resources that are valued at hundreds of thousands of dollars, most likely. 

With that said, students should 100% be able to make their own streaming, video channels or merchandise and profit off their name if they want as long as they don't use any university likenesses. That way they can profit off their own skill or personalty, just like any other student at the school. 

If lawmakers want athletes to be paid then they should force the NFL to lift the embargo on 3 years out of high school and allow teams to buy young talent and develop it themselves like they do in soccer. 

If lawmakers want to really help the athletes they should focus on their health and require at least 2 days off each week, not allow more than 1 football game per 7 days, not allow more than 4 games in a row without a BYE, and get rid of plastic pads/helmets. 

HS
Eph97's picture

CA should tell NCAA to F off. Pay the players and watch the players flock to CA to play. The NCAA and Dabo Sweeney can cry how its so unfair for the players to get paid while he makes $11 million a year off their labor.

HS
semperfibuck's picture

Other than Jim Harbaugh, Mark Emmert is the most overpaid - and useless - man in America.The only explanation of his continued employment: he has pictures...

HS
Enzo's picture

I don't know that paying student athletes has an equitable solution. Maybe a better approach would be to loosen the rules governing an athletes rights to his own likeness. If a star athlete can profit from his success through promotion, then he should have that right. If an athlete can get a better summer job because of his status, so be it. I get that boosters will find a way to screw that up in some way, but there's no shortage of NCAA compliance personnel that can help police the process. Maybe a salary cap or deferred payment on amount above the cap could be implemented.

If the NCAA can't get it done on it's own, then maybe Congress needs to investigate and remove their non-profit status. What does Emmert make?

HS
QBYBuckeye's picture

The NCAA finally gets something right and you rip them for it.  Scholarship players are getting paid plenty as it is, unless you think a degree from Ohio State is worth nothing and costs the students nothing. Room, board, tuition, books, health care, and ann opportunity to showcase your talents for the pro league are not pay enough? 

Sorry, but you are dead wrong on this one. 

New York Buckeye

HS