As a lifelong college sports fan I wish this change never happened. However to say that the players had all the cards is absolute insanity.
Rules need to change
- Thread starter RUich
- Start date
The NCAA and/or the larger leagues need to take action--well-advised, smart, forward-thinking action. Hire nationwide advisors on antitrust and labor laws. Conduct a serious analysis of the available options for governing things going forward. Understand why the old system is no longer viable but also analyze how things can be governed in the future to maintain a semblance of continuity and organization, all while allowing payment of players, NIL, and some player mobility that isn't the wild west. It will be difficult but, if done smartly, it will work and be defensible in the courts.
Instead, though, the NCAA and college administrators are sitting on their hands, stunned or uninterested, and have handed the governance of college sports over to emergency motions in courthouses that, chunk by chunk, implement sweeping governance changes to the industry with no vision regarding what the industry will or should become. It's unsustainable.
The fault lies with the NCAA, conferences and schools that do next to nothing as outside forces insert themselves to govern things in a way that, if not stopped, could end everything.
Instead, though, the NCAA and college administrators are sitting on their hands, stunned or uninterested, and have handed the governance of college sports over to emergency motions in courthouses that, chunk by chunk, implement sweeping governance changes to the industry with no vision regarding what the industry will or should become. It's unsustainable.
The fault lies with the NCAA, conferences and schools that do next to nothing as outside forces insert themselves to govern things in a way that, if not stopped, could end everything.
Or when college kids sign a contract to attend a university and they pay a buyout to that university if they break the contract, well then….
I’m all in on both coaches Schiano and Pikiell, but it’s time we make some serious noise. Both have been here long enough. I’ve heard enough that our team is young, and that our players are warriors.
It’s not going to happen because the kids have all the negotiating power. If Rutgers tries to put that clause in a contract, that kid will find another school willing to match the pay without that requirement.
Hence the topic rule changes. And my response was to the different rules for coaches. Some rules have to be put in place, it’s the Wild West now. Coaches I believe have some buyout clauses in their contracts, so technically not ‘Free’ to leave. Plus they can get fired.
As I always point out, fans (and coaches) don't actually want that.
Bring back Mag, Simpson, Woolf and Griffiths!!
Basically all our transfers (who everyone agrees are upgrades) wouldn't be here.
Reminder - HC Pike recruited 5 freshman for 3 open scholarships.
He went into this offseason requiring 2 transfers just to make the roster limit.
With your contract situation, that wouldn't have been possible.
Huh? Each coach negotiates their own buy out clause. There’s no requirement to have one but schools agree to terms to do what they need to sign the coach they want. I don’t see how this could be different in this sense. The NCAA and the government have nothing to do with either side of these player contracts. Which governing body could even have jurisdiction to mandate inclusion of a buyout for each contract negotiated by completely different parties? It doesn’t make sense.
I'll repeat the question for those who don't want students to make any money.
Just explain to me and the others on the message board here, why the former NCAA president, made around 3M per year as a salary......and explain in clear basic facts, why the NCAA can market March Madness for over 1 BILLION dollars a year, BUT the actual players who are playing should get ZERO??
Just explain to me and the others on the message board here, why the former NCAA president, made around 3M per year as a salary......and explain in clear basic facts, why the NCAA can market March Madness for over 1 BILLION dollars a year, BUT the actual players who are playing should get ZERO??
I have been pretty consistent....players should receive a portion of March madness $. when they receive it not sure.
40 years ago college sports could exist with multiple sports with expenses minimal. It won't be long until that is gone.
Let's stop the charade. Joining a conference playing in California?
Make it a professional sports league with teams playing at colleges. Keep colleges out of it from cost and revenue standpoint and just allow them to put names on.
Don't make Ace and Dylan go to classes.
40 years ago college sports could exist with multiple sports with expenses minimal. It won't be long until that is gone.
Let's stop the charade. Joining a conference playing in California?
Make it a professional sports league with teams playing at colleges. Keep colleges out of it from cost and revenue standpoint and just allow them to put names on.
Don't make Ace and Dylan go to classes.
I was listening to Bill Simmons podcast the other day and college athletics craziness came up.
Someone mentioned “and that’s how you get Cal in the ACC”
BS nearly lost his mind (he doesn’t follow college much).
“Wait! Cal is in the ACC now???”
It really is mind blowing when you say it out loud.
I don’t know. At that point it’ll feel like the connection to the school doesn’t exist. Basically - it could feel to the student body like a professional team is just renting out the venue. Seems like there’d be a risk that the connection to the student body would dissipitate over time. May as well just create a minor league at that point with different team names entirely. In which case - it’s just a second G-league or farm system. I don’t like it either but I think they need the charade.
I’ll double down and say that the NIL and earning potential has ties to the “student athlete” being a part of the school. When Geo or Caleb goes up for their diploma - they are a part of the school
The players have value because there are restrictions to players between 18 and 22 years of age.
Player values would shrink if you
1. Got rid of age requirement for NBa
2. Allow any player to play in college and not restrict for 4 years
Player values would shrink if you
1. Got rid of age requirement for NBa
2. Allow any player to play in college and not restrict for 4 years
I used to pretend college athletes didnt get paid illegally.
I think you are pretending if you think in the future a major conference athlete has a strong affiliation with the school.
This is the dumbest argument mentioned on this topic. We act like college coaches didnt have to sacrifice 100X more than the players to get into their positions.
What sacrifice does it take to become a P4 head coach?
What sacrifice does it take to become P4 player?
Answer those two and your eyes may open up.
Perhaps, but even if it’s a farce, the way the system works now, the vast majority of college athletes do actually earn degrees from the school that their fans follow so regardless of how close the affiliation actually is, the connection makes sense. What your suggesting would eliminate any semblance of a connection. Take Seton Hall as a convenient example (strongest point). How would following a basketball team playing out of the Pru be different from a music artists playing a concert out of the Prudential Center? They don’t represent the university if none of the kids attend the school. It’d then be a farce for the players to wear the jersey.
They still will unless what you suggest happens because the earning potential to continue attending university will remain. Playing ball abroad in place of 4 years of college will be mostly a thing of the past.
Here’s another twist - if what you suggest becomes reality - why only have a 4 year limit on eligibility? They aren’t student athletes now so the concept of freshman to senior also goes out the window. There are a lot of little things your not thinking of that as a stand alone, seem minor, but I do think there’s a big risk of following dropping.
You are working from a false premise that student athletes don't make any $. How much does four years of a scholarship cost? $200Kish. How much does four years of basically free healthcare cost? $40Kish. How much do four years of free tutoring and better food than regular students don't get cost? Don't the kids get like a $5K stipend now too. I had to work in the school library after practices for spending $.
Now it was dumb that kids could run camps, ect because they were athletes. Giving kids part of the revenue going to athletic departments that weren't make $ in the first place is dumb. Does the employee of say, Nos Energy Drink, which may be losing $ get a big payday because it's parent Coca Cola makes $? 280 schools didn't have anything to do with March Madness last year. You know who does get a big payday, the guy that ran Coke, or ran March Madness. Its how the world works.
I said that a few posts ago. That would crush player’s values because the talent pool would become so large. There would be only a handful players coming out of HS having any real value.
If NOS is losing money - why management keep getting raises?
"There is no money for some employees. Others are getting huge raises."
HC, assistant coaches, admin staff (presumably) are all getting raises even though 'the AD is losing money'.
If ADs are losing money, then why does everyone keep getting raises?
Why do we limit the amount of years these players can play? Why cant they go to graduate school or take 5 years of under graduate?
I suspect there are a domino effect of small issues that would build up into a pool of large issues that would render the league completely disconnected from the schools and consequently would kill the sports following over time. Alums would continue to support the school with their team logo on it out of nostalgia but the new students would likely regard the team with apathy over time. A glorified G league.
A lot of noise - but the case in point is that I hope the requirement to attend school continues for this reason. If it doesn’t, I think college sports (basketball and football) die a slow death.
It is a glorified G league right now. Cliff is not at RU, a college that he probably prefers to attend because his new school makes him more money.
The college players pick is the one that pays them the most. They arent going for their majors, the location, the dining hall and dorms, whether the campus is small are large, etc.
Dylan and Ace are going to be in airplanes 10+ times during their only semesters at RU. They arent pursuing majors. It is the G league. It is a farce.
The college players pick is the one that pays them the most. They arent going for their majors, the location, the dining hall and dorms, whether the campus is small are large, etc.
Dylan and Ace are going to be in airplanes 10+ times during their only semesters at RU. They arent pursuing majors. It is the G league. It is a farce.
Because - college ball is viewed as the near mandatory rite of passage to the NBA. Thats why the future NBA prospects continue to play in it. The finite end. You play for 4 years and your done. Differentiates it from the G league.
That part of the system, the scholarships, isn’t really broken. It’s not a bad thing for everyone passing through to attain some level of education and a community tie to the university they represent. I don’t see why this needs to end.
Things are going to get interesting if a college player takes the ncaa to court challenging them limiting their years of eligibility. What would the NCAA say back? The kids can claim, it is limiting their free market ability to earn money while getting an education.
It's turned into clown world.
We have only Ogobole, jamike and jwill returning and a bunch of new guys
Jamike is only guy that we recruited coming back
Jamike is only guy that we recruited coming back
No it’s not. Cliff is going to get a grad degree from U of Alabama. He represents them now. There is a tie to them, albeit he probably feels more of a connection to RU because he was here longer. But there is still a connection.
Athletes were never going for the dorms and campus but they still walk around those places and are part of the community for the time they are there. When their sport isn’t in season they attend classes pretty regularly. The players have friends in college who don’t play ball. They go to parties and do stuff with those kids. Heck sometimes they get in trouble with them (see Flood era). Whatever - for better or worse - there is still some connection. If you change that and make it 30 year old professionals -that is less and less. You will see less and less interest from students. There will be no point in having the connection to the school. Over time - it dies
Quincy Douby cant play a 4th year at Rutgers next year because he turned professional. Isnt that now outdated? Why cant Quincy go to school and play for us?
Didnt alabama or some school basically tirn their entire roster over and make it far.
Well there are some teams who can buy rosters every year. Those same teams were doing it under the table before anyway. So it’s nothing really new. For RU, we’ve done well with retention when we are successful. Rest assured, if RU went to the Sweet 16 two years ago Paul would’ve stayed.
Only if it nets red on the universities books. If they net green it doesn’t matter. Money is fungible.
It does and really will going forward. As I predicted and debated with you NIL will kill olympic sports.
And if players were tied to 4 year contracts, that team would mostly carry over to next year and the year after.
Restricting player movement is a noble idea - when you don’t have busts.
Otherwise you get a backcourt rotation with Jalen Miller, Derek Simpson and JMike.
Florida now allowing NIL for HS students.
https://www.dallasnews.com/high-sch...igh-school-athletes-to-profit-from-nil-deals/
https://www.dallasnews.com/high-sch...igh-school-athletes-to-profit-from-nil-deals/
