Jump to content
soupslam1

California Bill to Pay Athletes Passes

Recommended Posts

Not going to bother to read seven pages of prior posts so this may already have been stated. Any legislation which says a big Phuck You to the NCAA has to be good.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Agree with all of this. If it means a massive number of less-talented kids get a free education, then so be it. Young aspiring entertainers that pursue music or acting don’t have easy access (for the most part) to scholarships, I don’t see why athletes have to be in this special category. People with this stupid faux outrage at the thought of low income athletes not getting a free education should direct that outrage at the absurd cost of higher education in the U.S. that makes these scholarships such a big deal in the first place. 

Education costs a lot everywhere. It's just that everywhere else they expect you to be able to live with your parents and they exclude about 75% of the population from even considering higher education. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, soupslam1 said:

Very good points. If the NFL starts a minor league, the stars will get paid. The less talented kids and lower level coaches will get screwed. And the fan base for the minor leagues will be much smaller than what the colleges draw now. Most people that go to college games either attended or have some affinity for the school. There will be no such allegiance to minor league teams

This really exposes the fatal flaw at the heart of the NFL. Lots of manufactured fan loyalty built on "football fans" who spend little time really thinking through their brand affinities or why they should be loyal to a brand when that brand really does nothing for you other than provide a product for you to purchase as a consumer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SleepingGiantFan said:

Not going to bother to read seven pages of prior posts so this may already have been stated. Any legislation which says a big Phuck You to the NCAA has to be good.

Not always. In this case you’ll be f-ing yourself. On one end, The NCAA could rule CA schools ineligible, or on the other end, FBS football is destroyed. Anytime you have an arrogant fvck like CA trying to force its will on everyone else, the rally cry should become fvck CA, no the NCAA. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

Agree with all of this. If it means a massive number of less-talented kids get a free education, then so be it. Young aspiring entertainers that pursue music or acting don’t have easy access (for the most part) to scholarships, I don’t see why athletes have to be in this special category. People with this stupid faux outrage at the thought of low income athletes not getting a free education should direct that outrage at the absurd cost of higher education in the U.S. that makes these scholarships such a big deal in the first place. 

Athletes are special because people need allegiance to something.   Not a huge coincidence that as religious participation fell sports exploded in popularity (and more recently slavish devotion to media franchises, but that's another conversation).

Whether the current exorbitant cost of college is fair (it isn't) is immaterial because that problem is absolutely not going to be solved before the NCAA implodes.  The question is how long the infrastructure takes to re-adjust after it does.  The absolute elite talent will just segue right into the farm leagues/draft immediately and yearly thereafter like baseball.   The rich but not talented kids will just be absorbed back into the regular school system, but that'll still leave an average of what, 20k kids a year largely poor and black out of scholarships between all levels of scholarship football?  Will there be sufficient financial aid and/or immediate jobs for them out of HS?

This isn't faux outrage so much as disappointment over the thought of the sequence of events most likely to take place.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Wyovanian said:

This really exposes the fatal flaw at the heart of the NFL. Lots of manufactured fan loyalty built on "football fans" who spend little time really thinking through their brand affinities or why they should be loyal to a brand when that brand really does nothing for you other than provide a product for you to purchase as a consumer.

this is sports in general.  though football specifically probably satisfies our need for bloodsports more than, say, basketball or baseball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Nevada Convert said:

Not always. In this case you’ll be f-ing yourself. On one end, The NCAA could rule CA schools ineligible, or on the other end, FBS football is destroyed. Anytime you have an arrogant fvck like CA trying to force its will on everyone else, the rally cry should become fvck CA, no the NCAA. 

You fail to see how the dominoes are going to fall from this. By being able to pay players, Cal, Stanford, UCLA and USC are going to gain a recruiting advantage over the other 8 P12 schools who will therefore inevitably push for such legislation within their state and if that allows the P12 to basically keep the other power conferences from poaching stud athletes from California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Utah, the NCAA itself will eventually change its rules.

The NCAA is dinosaur coprolite which must either change with the times or cease to exist and it seems to me this legislation is going to help considerably in doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see Colorado passing a similar law quickly after California's governor signs it into law or after 30 days.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rofl_copter_dos said:

this is sports in general.  though football specifically probably satisfies our need for bloodsports more than, say, basketball or baseball.

A university's brand is (usually) bigger than its athletic department. The fan loyalty runs deeper than specialized, single-product brands. It's less a thirst for bloodsport among college fans than it is simply identity with the school, whether as alumni or resident of the school's locale. Arguably, the NFL caters to the less invested and more visceral fan. That's a huge weakness in a brand.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rofl_copter_dos said:

Athletes are special because people need allegiance to something.   Not a huge coincidence that as religious participation fell sports exploded in popularity (and more recently slavish devotion to media franchises, but that's another conversation).

Whether the current exorbitant cost of college is fair (it isn't) is immaterial because that problem is absolutely not going to be solved before the NCAA implodes.  The question is how long the infrastructure takes to re-adjust after it does.  The absolute elite talent will just segue right into the farm leagues/draft immediately and yearly thereafter like baseball.   The rich but not talented kids will just be absorbed back into the regular school system, but that'll still leave an average of what, 20k kids a year largely poor and black out of scholarships between all levels of scholarship football?  Will there be sufficient financial aid and/or immediate jobs for them out of HS?

This isn't faux outrage so much as disappointment over the thought of the sequence of events most likely to take place.   

I wasn’t accusing you in particular of faux outrage, sorry if it came across that way. I get annoyed when people use the “but what about the broke kids hmmmm?” Line, because often times they don’t really give a shit about the poor kids they are just using them to get the “moral high ground” in the debate. The system, as you put it, is a sham. Yes, doing away with the system means some kids probably won’t get scholarships that otherwise would have; it’s an unfortunate consequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SalinasSpartan said:

I wasn’t accusing you in particular of faux outrage, sorry if it came across that way. I get annoyed when people use the “but what about the broke kids hmmmm?” Line, because often times they don’t really give a shit about the poor kids they are just using them to get the “moral high ground” in the debate. The system, as you put it, is a sham. Yes, doing away with the system means some kids probably won’t get scholarships that otherwise would have; it’s an unfortunate consequence.

ahhhh.

 

Also worth noting the collapse of college sports will put a good chunk of people working in ancillary industries out of work. Particularly journalists, as if that profession didn't have enough problems with employment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SleepingGiantFan said:

You fail to see how the dominoes are going to fall from this. By being able to pay players, Cal, Stanford, UCLA and USC are going to gain a recruiting advantage over the other 8 P12 schools who will therefore inevitably push for such legislation within their state and if that allows the P12 to basically keep the other power conferences from poaching stud athletes from California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Utah, the NCAA itself will eventually change its rules.

The NCAA is dinosaur coprolite which must either change with the times or cease to exist and it seems to me this legislation is going to help considerably in doing that.

The law will spread across the land and abuses will be rampant. This will further marginalize  the competitive balance between P5 and G5 schools. As a Boise State fan I’m not in favor for that reason. As an Aztec fan you should also be concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SleepingGiantFan said:

You fail to see how the dominoes are going to fall from this. By being able to pay players, Cal, Stanford, UCLA and USC are going to gain a recruiting advantage over the other 8 P12 schools who will therefore inevitably push for such legislation within their state and if that allows the P12 to basically keep the other power conferences from poaching stud athletes from California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and Utah, the NCAA itself will eventually change its rules.

The NCAA is dinosaur coprolite which must either change with the times or cease to exist and it seems to me this legislation is going to help considerably in doing that.

You don't seem to realize what the NCAA could do. They could rule these schools ineligible to play in the NCAA. What would the CA schools do? form a new conference with the 7 CA schools and play each other to death having no interaction with any NCAA schools? 

This is a fvcking nightmare and killer for G5's like SDSU. I have no idea why you're so eager to end cfb as we know it if the pvssy NCAA caves and allows it to happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Monty93 said:

You're not considering the amount of support and administrative services related to those scholarships - or you have a different definition of "nothing". You have to add in the ancillary costs that are related to athletic scholarships (NCAA compliance costs, tutoring services, meals, athletic housing, etc), which are not minor. 

I am considering everything, that support is there because they want these kids eligible so they can make the school millions of dollars.

Otherwise they would just recruit from the student body eligible students for their sports teams.

Giving out 400 scholarships costs a school with 20 thousand students like BSU almost nothing.    Now BSU pays more money than they need to but that is because they are making big bucks off these kids.

 

The schools that want to compete will do very well on a level playing field.  The schools that don't like now will not do well.  It has nothing to do with the players getting paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing that scares me at all about this law, if it were to go national, is that it will take away too much control from the coaches.  This is not the school paying players, this is boosters with free reign to negotiate deals with players.  Basically it's like a scholarship that comes from an outside party.  That outside party now has a lot of control over whether that kid transfers or not.  Let's just say Hank has a bad season and gets his endorsement yanked.  Now he's got to look at transferring if he wants to keep the cash cow alive.  Not to pick on that player, but you get my point.

As far as a competitive advantage going to schools with richer or more willing boosters, so what?  They're already paying better than we are.  This just brings the bagman out of the shadows.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nevada Convert said:

You don't seem to realize what the NCAA could do. They could rule these schools ineligible to play in the NCAA. What would the CA schools do? form a new conference with the 7 CA schools and play each other to death having no interaction with any NCAA schools? 

This is a fvcking nightmare and killer for G5's like SDSU. I have no idea why you're so eager to end cfb as we know it if the pvssy NCAA caves and allows it to happen. 

I accepted this inevitability about 2-3 years ago.    The timeframe has been accelerated by the NCAA's clownshoes amateurish handling of, well, literally everything for the last decade and a half.   Had the NCAA not been so dedicated to shafting G5s/mid majors, halfheartedly enforcing its own rules, publicly screwing over athletes with edge case situations that tested NCAA rules, and had it at least made an attempt to rein in ballooning coach salaries and the conference musical chairs shenanigans it's likely it would have been able to stave this off for a good decade or more as public perception (at least among more left-leaning lawmakers that would handle this stuff) wouldn't be quite so bad.  

 

When the NCAA inevitably crumbles, i'll be a bit miffed at the loss of my 'Dogs, but i'll segue back into watching the NFL.   In the meantime i'll root for my team and enjoy games while it lasts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truly I do not see what the euphoria amongst Cali schools is about. The NCAA which represents the major conferences (including the PAC) will simply not permit the athletes who are receiving payments to play sports outside the state of California.  The California schools which for the most part are not doing well in football or basketball will have the choice of playing only Cali teams or playing in other states under NCAA rules meaning those receiving payments will not be permitted to play. The NCAA also has the right to ban those who are outside of compliance from the football playoff, bowl games and the basketball national championship tourney.

California is by far the largest state in population but not so large as to cause serious problems in the sport. Remember we have only 7 Division one bowl eligible teams and less than 9.98% percent of total population (census estimate 2020 population.)  A large percent is Hispanic and amongst them soccer is the number one sport. The NCAA has always favored those schools who are in the major conferences. In California we have only 4 schools of this type. They will be an afterthought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, 1066 said:

Truly I do not see what the euphoria amongst Cali schools is about. The NCAA which represents the major conferences (including the PAC) will simply not permit the athletes who are receiving payments to play sports outside the state of California.  The California schools which for the most part are not doing well in football or basketball will have the choice of playing only Cali teams or playing in other states under NCAA rules meaning those receiving payments will not be permitted to play. The NCAA also has the right to ban those who are outside of compliance from the football playoff, bowl games and the basketball national championship tourney.

California is by far the largest state in population but not so large as to cause serious problems in the sport. Remember we have only 7 Division one bowl eligible teams and less than 9.98% percent of total population (census estimate 2020 population.)  A large percent is Hispanic and amongst them soccer is the number one sport. The NCAA has always favored those schools who are in the major conferences. In California we have only 4 schools of this type. They will be an afterthought.

If other states don't compete, California schools will get all the best athletes in the country.

The California championship will be the overall champion and no one will care about Alabama or Ohio State because they will be the minor league.

 

This is the end of the NCAA cheating kids for money.    Every big school in the country will compete and the NCAA will capitulate, they have no choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bluerules009 said:

If other states don't compete, California schools will get all the best athletes in the country.

The California championship will be the overall champion and no one will care about Alabama or Ohio State because they will be the minor league.

 

This is the end of the NCAA cheating kids for money.    Every big school in the country will compete and the NCAA will capitulate, they have no choice.

LOL!  As usual, you overstate the situation.  Most players will not choose UCLA over Alabama just because they "might" get an endorsement deal as opposed to just the usual under the table cash in Tuscaloosa.  This could end up going national, but not for the reasons you state.  Remember, this is not a paycheck from the school.  This is just granting the right to get paid for an endorsement, which will be limited to just a few top players.  It has the potential to change aspects of the sport, not blow it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Headbutt said:

LOL!  As usual, you overstate the situation.  Most players will not choose UCLA over Alabama just because they "might" get an endorsement deal as opposed to just the usual under the table cash in Tuscaloosa.  This could end up going national, but not for the reasons you state.  Remember, this is not a paycheck from the school.  This is just granting the right to get paid for an endorsement, which will be limited to just a few top players.  It has the potential to change aspects of the sport, not blow it up.

Why not choose a better school, higher pay, the ability to make your money in endorsements in a bigger city?

They would be a fool to not choose Alabama over UCLA or even Fresno state.

Especially when after a few years it becomes obvious California schools are far far better on the field of play as they blow Alabama off the field if they dare to come play in California.

 

Alabama would be a joke if they did not compete which of course they will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×