• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

SCOTUS 9-0 Ruling: "The NCAA is not above the law."

The difference is that a majority of Ivy League alumni, and newer Wake alums if we're being honest, don't have a large connection to their alma mater's athletic programs because they were not relevant when they attended.

True. I totally agree. But Mark Zuckerberg may think to himself "Hell, maybe it will be cool to see the Crimson win. Heck it might be fun. I think I will do maybe just a little something - I dunno, ok I'm gonna throw $500 million at the football players to divide evenly for helping me advertise this new idea I have. You know what? Make it a billion. My net worth increased $16 billion yesterday so I am in a good mood. Yawn."

Moral to the story remains - those who have CAN. And some WILL. No connection because my teams have sucked forever? I can fix both of those problems in about the next 5 minutes. The connection AND the losing.

You a create a hole, I can fill it. Amateur sports and anything close to a level playing field it had - is gone.
 
Zuckerberg could have thrown a billion at Alabama football at any time. The difference is now the players could get paid too.
 
Zuckerberg could have thrown a billion at Alabama football at any time. The difference is now the players could get paid too.

TBF Zuckerburg could have paid the players too. Just not out in the open. Large scale player compensation has been operating in the shadows my entire lifetime.
 
Gotcha. He could have through $1 billion at Harvard football at anytime too. The complaining isn’t about money in college sports. The complaining is about athletes getting paid instead of just coaches and administrators.
 
Gotcha. He could have through $1 billion at Harvard football at anytime too. The complaining isn’t about money in college sports. The complaining is about athletes getting paid instead of just coaches and administrators.

Oh yeah, I'm all for it. I just don't think its going to "save" the sport. Which is fine. I made peace with the NCAA model dying years ago. You can't actually believe in equality and labor rights, and agree with the "amateur" model. It is, and was, pure exploitation. In later years it is also been used to hand out scholarships and admission to undeserving wealthy students who's academic and athletic experience was funded by the labor of under compensated minority athletes.
 
TBF Zuckerburg could have paid the players too. Just not out in the open. Large scale player compensation has been operating in the shadows my entire lifetime.

While it was in the shadows only people who are willing to operate in the shadows were participating - shady people with money. Bringing it out of the shadows brings way more people with money into the game.
 
Oh yeah, I'm all for it. I just don't think its going to "save" the sport. Which is fine. I made peace with the NCAA model dying years ago. You can't actually believe in equality and labor rights, and agree with the "amateur" model. It is, and was, pure exploitation. In later years it is also been used to hand out scholarships and admission to undeserving wealthy students who's academic and athletic experience was funded by the labor of under compensated minority athletes.

I have always believed the whole exploitation of athletes argument was mostly BS - and still do. When you have as much money flowing into something as you did with college sports and the huge TV contracts over the last couple of decades, things get out of whack. The coaches salaries, the facilities races, etc. all got ridiculous. But I still believe the athletes were mostly beneficiaries of the system, not victims.
 
I have always believed the whole exploitation of athletes argument was mostly BS - and still do. When you have as much money flowing into something as you did with college sports and the huge TV contracts over the last couple of decades, things get out of whack. The coaches salaries, the facilities races, etc. all got ridiculous. But I still believe the athletes were mostly beneficiaries of the system, not victims.

Two things can be true:

1. The existence of the NCAA improved the lives of many poor and minority athletes, particularly those who could play basketball or football

2. If the NCAA didn't exist a minor league football and basketball infrastructure would exist and would compensate those same students more fairly

I personally think #2 is the better argument, but can understand why others may lean towards #1
 
Two things can be true:

1. The existence of the NCAA improved the lives of many poor and minority athletes, particularly those who could play basketball or football

2. If the NCAA didn't exist a minor league football and basketball infrastructure would exist and would compensate those same students more fairly

I personally think #2 is the better argument, but can understand why others may lean towards #1

#2 is possible. Compensation levels for the majority of players in baseball's minor leagues (operating alongside the NCAA, obviously) suggest it's by no means automatic.
 
I have always believed the whole exploitation of athletes argument was mostly BS - and still do. When you have as much money flowing into something as you did with college sports and the huge TV contracts over the last couple of decades, things get out of whack. The coaches salaries, the facilities races, etc. all got ridiculous. But I still believe the athletes were mostly beneficiaries of the system, not victims.



Agree. Of the 800 or so colleges that field a football team, the overwhelming majority will only appear on t.v. if their team makes it to a national championship game, most of their coaches make less than $100K, and the players receive full & partial athletic scholarships or grants-in-aid that allow them to have a reasonably balanced athletic/academic experience. Our local high school has produced a fair number of DI football players and a handful of NFL'ers, but I can name 10X that number who were able to parlay their high school careers into degrees from schools like Catawba, Davidson, W-S State, Elon, UNC-Pembroke, Methodist, etc. If "bigtime" college athletics gets blown up, hopefully those competing at a more modest level will still be able to exist.
 
let's see if zuckerburg can fuck this up as much as he's fucked up everything else
 
Perhaps minor league football will be run differently, but if minor league baseball and hockey (and even basketball) are a guide, the rank and file minor league football players will make very little, the facilities are atrocious and living accommodations are far below what college student athletes experience. The difference is that in minor league sports the coaches and the owners don't make anything either; so, it's apparently "fairer" than college sports were the coaches and others make big money off the sport.
 
Zuckerberg could have thrown a billion at Alabama football at any time. The difference is now the players could get paid too.

Yeah, I was referring to Harvard. But yeah that’s one difference. Thats the difference that is great for the players and maybe/probably fair and and certainly legal. The other difference is that you can DIRECTLY buy players. You/we can pick them. I know someone will probably step up and say that’s been going on forever, but don’t waste my time with that. Rich alumni can legally make a team better - by themselves. And all I’m doing here is pointing out ONE problem. Shit I can make a list and go in alphabetical order. But all of the problems lead to the one big problem which is the end of college football and basketball - anything remotely close to a level playing field is gone. When that happens, interest wanes and the sport as we know it dies.

It’s not just that the level playing field is gone is the problem. It’s the way in which it’s gone. You can still pull for you school to win. But they won’t be winning because of the reasons that make you proud to be an alumnus of that school. If your team wins, it won’t be because some great athletes saw the same thing in whatever university that you did and still do - it’s a great place to be a part of. Lovely campus, the people, the academics, the tradition, the brotherhood, the uniqueness, the location, etc. It will more than likely be because of financial incentives which we are all realistic enough to know trumps all. And it’s not really important whether in a particular case that’s the actual reality, it’s that we all now know it’s now heavily in the equation. So that being the case, no win or loss will ever mean the same again. Because it’s quite possibly that more money (direct to the athletes) beat less money.

And donations to an athletic department are not the same thing as paying players directly out in the wide open.
 
Yeah, I was referring to Harvard. But yeah that’s one difference. Thats the difference that is great for the players and maybe/probably fair and and certainly legal. The other difference is that you can DIRECTLY buy players. You/we can pick them. I know someone will probably step up and say that’s been going on forever, but don’t waste my time with that. Rich alumni can legally make a team better - by themselves. And all I’m doing here is pointing out ONE problem. Shit I can make a list and go in alphabetical order. But all of the problems lead to the one big problem which is the end of college football and basketball - anything remotely close to a level playing field is gone. When that happens, interest wanes and the sport as we know it dies.

It’s not just that the level playing field is gone is the problem. It’s the way in which it’s gone. You can still pull for you school to win. But they won’t be winning because of the reasons that make you proud to be an alumnus of that school. If your team wins, it won’t be because some great athletes saw the same thing in whatever university that you did and still do - it’s a great place to be a part of. Lovely campus, the people, the academics, the tradition, the brotherhood, the uniqueness, the location, etc. It will more than likely be because of financial incentives which we are all realistic enough to know trumps all. And it’s not really important whether in a particular case that’s the actual reality, it’s that we all now know it’s now heavily in the equation. So that being the case, no win or loss will ever mean the same again. Because it’s quite possibly that more money (direct to the athletes) beat less money.

And donations to an athletic department are not the same thing as paying players directly out in the wide open.

Right, because now they'll also clearly be tax deductible. Instead of handing out cash in a paper bag, now any rich alum with a business can write off his NIL payments to recruits as advertising expense. The recruits will now have to pay taxes on it, of course.
 
Two things can be true:

1. The existence of the NCAA improved the lives of many poor and minority athletes, particularly those who could play basketball or football

2. If the NCAA didn't exist a minor league football and basketball infrastructure would exist and would compensate those same students more fairly

I personally think #2 is the better argument, but can understand why others may lean towards #1

I think minor league basketball and football leagues would eventually fold, because there just won't be much interest. People don't go to G league or XFL games. So the players would be poorly compensated (XFL players base salary is $27,000 per year), and then eventually the leagues will fold.
 
I think minor league basketball and football leagues would eventually fold, because there just won't be much interest. People don't go to G league or XFL games. So the players would be poorly compensated (XFL players base salary is $27,000 per year), and then eventually the leagues will fold.

Minor league baseball mostly exists because it is supported by the major leagues. Players are mostly paid a pittance. But, if you are a young man who loves baseball it beats working for a living.

Past attempts at minor league, non-NFL football leagues have all failed, mostly because of money.

The current G-league in basketball will exist as long as THE NBA finds it useful and funds it.
 
Minor league baseball also has regional fanbases and tradition to bring in revenue.

The NBA wants to be active in developing players, coaches, administrators, and referees as part of being a quality league. The NBA is unique in that they directly support two leagues that don't make a profit to help meet that goal.

The NFL has little interest in development because there are so many players and coaches and not much in terms of alternative leagues. They don't really care if talent remains underdeveloped. A three year rule means that even the guys who leave early and don't make the NFL aren't too far off from earning a degree anyway.
 
Last edited:
Football has also by far the most overhead costs to run a team. The rosters need to be huge; there are major practice and game facility and support staff requirements; coaching staffs in football are huge; medical and training staffs are bigger. The NFL is so ridiculously rich that they could fund a massive minor league operation, but it would cost each team a chunk of money that they would rather not have to spend. The NFL will continue to go to great lengths to maintain its partnership with college football as it is not in NFL's interest to have college football collapse or even be reduced to a division of a small number of teams.
 
Football has also by far the most overhead costs to run a team. The rosters need to be huge; there are major practice and game facility and support staff requirements; coaching staffs in football are huge; medical and training staffs are bigger. The NFL is so ridiculously rich that they could fund a massive minor league operation, but it would cost each team a chunk of money that they would rather not have to spend. The NFL will continue to go to great lengths to maintain its partnership with college football as it is not in NFL's interest to have college football collapse or even be reduced to a division of a small number of teams.

College football is probably headed to a separation of deep pocket teams/boosters from the rest. Just like D1 BCS (85 Scholarships) mostly separated from D1 FCS (85 Scholarships). The richer schools will find ways to get the guys who play less glamorous positions paid. They will be the de facto new upper division. They will provide the bulk of NFL players. Maybe there will be a "limited earnings" division. Sign with one of the schools in that division knowing there is a cap on payments. Right now it's all speculation.
 
Back
Top