http://www.yosefscabin.com/forum/
This!NavyApp wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:00 amIt will be interesting to see how the NCAA responds. It says the schools can not punish the student athletes for getting money for their likeness and autographs and etc. I assume the NCAA could just enforce penalties on the institutions, it is really murky. I'm all for the kids getting a piece of this billion dollar industry that they create but there has to be a way to keep competitive balance or the blue bloods will further corner the market and the G5 will mostly be regulated to a newer FCS/D2. These next few years will be telling for the future of college athletics.
It's going to be a wait and see game. The NCAA has roughly 3.5 years to figure out what is best for them (because let's be honest that's all they care about). Are they going to be proactive on this issue? Or are they going to be reactive and see what kind of deals are being struck and it's affects on the national landscape? I personally believe if they go with option two it will equate to opening Pandora's hand to quote ancient Greek historian Paterculus "Precedents do not stop where they begin, but, however narrow the path upon which they enter, they create for themselves a highway whereon they may wander with the utmost latitude...no one thinks a course is base for himself which has proven profitable to others."asu66 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:15 amThis!NavyApp wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:00 amIt will be interesting to see how the NCAA responds. It says the schools can not punish the student athletes for getting money for their likeness and autographs and etc. I assume the NCAA could just enforce penalties on the institutions, it is really murky. I'm all for the kids getting a piece of this billion dollar industry that they create but there has to be a way to keep competitive balance or the blue bloods will further corner the market and the G5 will mostly be regulated to a newer FCS/D2. These next few years will be telling for the future of college athletics.
So what steps does an institution like App State take next?
This is the cliff at the bottom of the slippery slope. Add to it, agents. This compensation is not going to be equal. Using App for an example, ZT and DE are going to be bigger earners than a Huesman or Harrington. This doesn’t equal out anything. I could see the NCAA excluding California teams from post season play and not allow other schools to count wins against these teams.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
This will be the unintended consequence of this bill. Big time schools and their boosters will be able to buy all the top players with virtually no oversight. While good for those programs, it will water down the product on the field for the other 100+ programs.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
You make a good point. So, let's say ZT and DE get endorsement earnings but the offensive linemen that block for them get nothing. Seems like that could lead to some discord.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:13 pmThis is the cliff at the bottom of the slippery slope. Add to it, agents. This compensation is not going to be equal. Using App for an example, ZT and DE are going to be bigger earners than a Huesman or Harrington. This doesn’t equal out anything. I could see the NCAA excluding California teams from post season play and not allow other schools to count wins against these teams.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
You really think if the NCAA allows(they are the governing body of college athletics) this to into effect every other state will not follow suit? You also think that the NCAA is going to lose their Cali brands?AppSt94 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:13 pmThis is the cliff at the bottom of the slippery slope. Add to it, agents. This compensation is not going to be equal. Using App for an example, ZT and DE are going to be bigger earners than a Huesman or Harrington. This doesn’t equal out anything. I could see the NCAA excluding California teams from post season play and not allow other schools to count wins against these teams.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
But the QB's and WR's still get paid a lot more than the linemen, and this hasn't caused fracturing of teams in the NFL. This won't change anything. Everyone is worried about the "blue blood" programs being able to buy players, as if that doesn't already happen in a roundabout way. A big-money booster gives money to Alabama to build a new practice facility or locker room or hot tubs or whatever. This helps with recruitment. Now, instead of that stuff, they give the players a no-show job at their business or put them in a commercial. App boosters could do the same thing. If anything, I think it would help App. Now, if an App alumnus owns a restaurant or car dealership or what-have-you, they can pay an App player to be in a commercial. I'd assume this would just go in the normal advertising budget instead of them having to make an extra contribution to Yosef Club or whatever. I think it's a win for everybody.Rick83 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:25 pmYou make a good point. So, let's say ZT and DE get endorsement earnings but the offensive linemen that block for them get nothing. Seems like that could lead to some discord.AppSt94 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:13 pmThis is the cliff at the bottom of the slippery slope. Add to it, agents. This compensation is not going to be equal. Using App for an example, ZT and DE are going to be bigger earners than a Huesman or Harrington. This doesn’t equal out anything. I could see the NCAA excluding California teams from post season play and not allow other schools to count wins against these teams.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
In the NFL this happens but they all get paid.
I know Cali is a top 5-6 economy in the world but the Cali programs have pretty much been irrelevant in major college sports since USC/Reggie Bush over a decade ago. Does anyone outside of the west coast even watch the #PAC12afterdark?
I wouldn’t rule anything out at this point, but yeah. Do you think that Arizona and Washington are going to like being in a conference with four teams that have a distinct recruiting advantage? Most of the Northern conference members and Boise St go into California to get recruits. You think Alabama and Clemson or Notre Dame are going to be happy about losing blue chip players to Cal? The only school that the NCAA would probably miss having a relationship with would be Stanford. I guess more states would look into it as well but I don’t know how many would actually pull the trigger. I want to see how this plays out in the courts.NavyApp wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:26 pmYou really think if the NCAA allows(they are the governing body of college athletics) this to into effect every other state will not follow suit? You also think that the NCAA is going to lose their Cali brands?AppSt94 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:13 pmThis is the cliff at the bottom of the slippery slope. Add to it, agents. This compensation is not going to be equal. Using App for an example, ZT and DE are going to be bigger earners than a Huesman or Harrington. This doesn’t equal out anything. I could see the NCAA excluding California teams from post season play and not allow other schools to count wins against these teams.BTK2000 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 11:55 amI’m for the idea of it overall but my brother, a UNC, grad and I were talking about it. He said that it could open up a door for boosters to go nuts. You got an alum who owns a car dealership? Guess who just sponsored that recruit who was debating between your school and another.
I get your point, and it makes logical sense. But this is the NCAA we are talking about here. They are notoriously protective of the blue blood "brands". Even though they "went after" UNC, what was the end result? Watch what happens with Kansas; I would almost put money on a similar outcome. UCLA and USC are HUGE brands and don't forget this is not restricted to football. Think of baseball, track and field, soccer, basketball. The NCAA is not going to lose the money that those brands bring in for the sake of "amateurism". This whole issue is their own fault, the tide has been shifting in this direction for a number of years now. Instead of dictating the change they are now going to have to figure out how to adapt to the new normal. Personal opinion here but by judging how the NCAA handles situations they are going to wait until the 11th hour to address this and will find some way botch it. This ultimately is not about the student athletes (though it should be), it is about their ability to control the finances of a multi billion dollar industry on the backs of a cheap labor force.moonshine wrote: ↑Mon Sep 30, 2019 12:51 pmI know Cali is a top 5-6 economy in the world but the Cali programs have pretty much been irrelevant in major college sports since USC/Reggie Bush over a decade ago. Does anyone outside of the west coast even watch the #PAC12afterdark?
I think the Big 12 (10) is probably happy to see a P5 conference take itself out of contention for the CFP as teams from AZ, OR and WA will have their wins against Cali schools ruled ineligible.