Diehards: Deante Gray calls debate over paying players ‘laughable’ after NCAA earnings report

[Austintxfrog94]

Well, for one it isn’t a job. Second there are similarities in the real world. You pretty much sign over your likeness and ideas while on the job at most places. I have a friend that works for Shell Oil who invented an off shore process to put down pipelines that saved billions. Since he developed it on the job he had no rights to a patent or the the money. Although he may have gotten a bonus or a raise. And this was a real profession, real life, tax paying job and not a part time gig that lasts four or five years.

Having signed similar agreements and NDA’s this is on point. Again I’m all for players getting more than what they are currently getting but it seems the people screaming the loudest on the issue don’t likely have the long-term interests of college football, the student athlete and universities in mind.

 

[Zubaz]

What is amoral about providing the opportunity to get a free education? They know it isn’t employment going in and if they don’t it should be explained ahead of time the difference.

Knowledge of an unfair situation going in to an unfair situation doesn't make it not unfair. The fact is that for 99% of elite athletes, the road to the NFL goes through college football, that disparate power structure makes any notion of "choice" rather suspect. To be fair, that has zero to do with the NCAA and far more to do with the NFLPA's policy of only allowing 3+ years out of high school to be drafted, but the NCAA certainly benefits from it.

The question you have to ask is whether or not it's morally correct that a league which is *wink wink* amateur but in all other manners operates as a professional league (with television rights contracts, branded merchandise, likenesses, ticket sales, etc), basically a Semi-Professional league generating millions of dollars, doesn't allow the players to be compensated. Or, at least not beyond primarily non-monetary that is officially only somewhat related to their athletic performance.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

i didn't say tcu, i said a third party that not only profited off your likeness, but restricted your ability to do so much as get a part time job.

Like I said, if he thinks he can squeeze the NCAA, go for it. I’m not sure they made much of GG’s likeness, though.

 

[Wexahu]

if during your time at tcu someone used your services and likeness to generate income would you have an issue with that?

not the school which offered you a scholarship and was providing an educational opportunity, but a third party organization that actually not only made money off or your services and likeness it also told you that you could not have a part time job while at school.

interesting concept when you consider that during the ncaa tournament when you will have 40,000+ in the alamo dome at the final 4 the only people who are not allowed to get a job if they want one are the basketball teams that people are paying to watch.

I could maybe see if a bunch of jerseys are sold with a specific players # on it some kind of compensation being paid to the player. But what if a bunch of jerseys are made with a specific # that are sold at a loss? Would that player owe the school or NCAA for the loss? What about the many many #4 TCU jerseys that are still sold. Who would get that cash? LT or the kid at TCU currently wearing #4?

This is just one small example of something that would seem very simple but is anything but. As was mentioned before, this would be an almost impossible thing to set up, monitor and keep track of. Take the NCAA profit and divide it by whatever how many schools/athletes there are and the money to be divided would be a drop in the bucket.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

Knowledge of an unfair situation going in to an unfair situation doesn't make it not unfair. The fact is that for 99% of elite athletes, the road to the NFL goes through college football, that disparate power structure makes any notion of "choice" rather suspect. To be fair, that has zero to do with the NCAA and far more to do with the NFLPA's policy of only allowing 3+ years out of high school to be drafted, but the NCAA certainly benefits from it.

The question you have to ask is whether or not it's morally correct that a league which is *wink wink* amateur but in all other manners operates as a professional league (with television rights contracts, branded merchandise, likenesses, ticket sales, etc), basically a Semi-Professional league generating millions of dollars, doesn't allow the players to be compensated. Or, at least not beyond primarily non-monetary that is officially only somewhat related to their athletic performance.

Here’s an idea. If someone finds it amoral, don’t sign the LOI.

I think I have heard the this before, but life isn’t fair.

 

[Eight]

Well, for one it isn’t a job. Second there are similarities in the real world. You pretty much sign over your likeness and ideas while on the job at most places. I have a friend that works for Shell Oil who invented an off shore process to put down pipelines that saved billions. Since he developed it on the job he had no rights to a patent or the the money. Although he may have gotten a bonus or a raise. And this was a real profession, real life, tax paying job and not a part time gig that lasts four or five years.

if a regulatory body were to profit off this process that your friend developed would that be appropriate?

not shell who he received compensation from, but a regulatory body whose function was to oversee and control their activities. a regulatory body who he did not work for, received no compensation, and really contributed nothing to the developmental process?

 

[Zubaz]

I could maybe see if a bunch of jerseys are sold with a specific players # on it some kind of compensation being paid to the player. But what if a bunch of jerseys are made with a specific # that are sold at a loss? Would that player owe the school or NCAA for the loss?

What? That's....not how likenesses are sold. You pay the person for the right to produce merchandise with their likeness. Unless they're going in to business with you, why in the world would they be on the hook for any losses?

What about the many many #4 TCU jerseys that are still sold. Who would get that cash? LT or the kid at TCU currently wearing #4?

You, uh, forget which number LT wore? Or did LT and Casey Pachall have some financial arrangement that I am not aware of?

 

[Zubaz]

Here’s an idea. If someone finds it amoral, don’t sign the LOI.

I think I have heard the this before, but life isn’t fair.

Boss to woman: "Sleep with me or you don't get that promotion. I am not making you do anything, it's totally your choice. If you find it amoral, you are well within your rights to not sleep with me. Hey, life isn't fair".

Yeah, probably not going to be accepted.

 

[MinerFrog2409]

I didn’t have a car at TCU until I could afford it.

I worked summer jobs at a Houston refinery with a UT center under Royal who did the same thing.

I’m glad that a center under Darrell Royal could make it work in 1970. Things don’t work that way any longer. If you want to be an elite athlete you are working out or watching film outside of practice. Football is a full time job. Again I’m not saying that these players should get rich but a couple hundred extra bucks a month goes a long way. That’s the least the NCAA can do.

 

[Wexahu]

What? That's....not how likenesses are sold. You pay the person for the right to produce merchandise with their likeness. Unless they're going in to business with you, why in the world would they be on the hook for any losses?


You, uh, forget which number LT wore? Or did LT and Casey Pachall have some financial arrangement that I am not aware of?

I'm thoroughly embarrassed. For some reason I had it in my head that he wore #4. Man, that's bad.

As to your first point, what if Josh Docston doesn't want his #9 likeness to be sold (he did wear #9, didn't he?) but the current wearer of #9 (or some former #9) is fine with it. Who gets the money when those #9 jerseys are sold?

 

[DickBumpastache]

Having signed similar agreements and NDA’s this is on point. Again I’m all for players getting more than what they are currently getting but it seems the people screaming the loudest on the issue don’t likely have the long-term interests of college football, the student athlete and universities in mind.

Let’s break this down:
1. CFB: why should anyone care about the future of a sport when the people profiting off said sport have been doing so at the expense of those actually playing the sport? And why would college football die if the players were to get paid?

2. The student athlete: Are you kidding me? You believe the current system serves them better than receiving compensation for their labor? Again, aside from advocating for a corrupt, socialist system, you’re also saying that it’s better for someone to not get paid than to get paid.

3. Universities: Give me a break. What is TCU’s endowment up to now, $2.5 billion? Is it honestly your contention that colleges will go broke or suffer in any way because kids get money that otherwise would’ve gone to NCAA or conference fat cats?

 

[Eight]

I could maybe see if a bunch of jerseys are sold with a specific players # on it some kind of compensation being paid to the player. But what if a bunch of jerseys are made with a specific # that are sold at a loss? Would that player owe the school or NCAA for the loss? What about the many many #4 TCU jerseys that are still sold. Who would get that cash? LT or the kid at TCU currently wearing #4?

This is just one small example of something that would seem very simple but is anything but. As was mentioned before, this would be an almost impossible thing to set up, monitor and keep track of. Take the NCAA profit and divide it by whatever how many schools/athletes there are and the money to be divided would be a drop in the bucket.

why would the player owe the ncaa money? why do people go to these extreme situations to try to prove a point?

if a print ad is run compensation is paid for the usage of the image of the individuals in the ad. that compensation depends upon how much is seen and if they are being paid on scale, daily rate, flat etc.....but you are being compensated for the use of your likeness. same with commercials etc.......

that is not the case with an ncaa athlete. the organization can use the athletes image and not compensate the athlete. in fact, there have been cases where athletes were offered legitimate endorsements for other endeavors and the athletes could not accept compensation.

i will ask the question again no one seems to answer. what does the ncaa, not the schools, provide back to the athletes to justify the money they make off the athletes all the while restricting the athletes ability to even work part time

 

[Zubaz]

As to your first point, what if Josh Docston doesn't want his #9 likeness to be sold (he did wear #9, didn't he?) but the current wearer of #9 (or some former #9) is fine with it. Who gets the money when those #9 jerseys are sold?

Reasonable question, I believe that's where some sort of arbiter or mediator would need to get involved. To use TCU as an example, if we tried to argue that a #2 Jersey was really a Taj Williams jersey, yeah I think we'd lose pretty easily, but something like #2 being between Boykin or Verrett, yeah I could see that getting complicated.

 

[Wexahu]

i will ask the question again no one seems to answer. what does the ncaa, not the schools, provide back to the athletes to justify the money they make off the athletes all the while restricting the athletes ability to even work part time

I would say the NCAA provides the structure and organization that allows for all the money to be made. Without the NCAA, I'm not sure college athletes (football players specifically) would be playing in front of $50k+ plus fans every week and million of TV eyeballs.....so the money they are talking about maybe wouldn't be there.

Maybe nobody would really know who Johnny Manziel was when he was 20 years old if the NCAA didn't exist. So how much money could JM have made signing autographs?

 

[Eight]

Having signed similar agreements and NDA’s this is on point. Again I’m all for players getting more than what they are currently getting but it seems the people screaming the loudest on the issue don’t likely have the long-term interests of college football, the student athlete and universities in mind.

the conferences control the television rights for their regular season games and not the ncaa. that was decided long, long ago when uga and i believe ou sued to be able to take that power away from the ncaa. the future of college football is a bit different than college basketball. the ncaa is absolutely dependent on the ncaa tournament and it is one big reason they have never been in a hurry to truly clean up college basketball.

in regards to the long-term heal of the universities it is possible to deliver a high quality education without a scholarship athletic program. it is more difficult, but it is possible just like it can be done without new dorms, rock climbing walls, etc...all a matter of choice.

 

[Wexahu]

Reasonable question, I believe that's where some sort of arbiter or mediator would need to get involved. To use TCU as an example, if we tried to argue that a #2 Jersey was really a Taj Williams jersey, yeah I think we'd lose pretty easily, but something like #2 being between Boykin or Verrett, yeah I could see that getting complicated.

And that is exactly my point. Seems easy, but when you break it down and start asking a bunch of what ifs (which WILL always get asked), it gets really, really complicated.

 

[Eight]

I would say the NCAA provides the structure and organization that allows for all the money to be made. Without the NCAA, I'm not sure college athletes (football players specifically) would be playing in front of $50k+ plus fans every week and million of TV eyeballs.....so the money they are talking about maybe wouldn't be there.

Maybe nobody would really know who Johnny Manziel was when he was 20 years old if the NCAA didn't exist. So how much money could JM have made signing autographs?

in football, the conferences control their broadcast rights for regular season compensation. been that way since the 80's when the schools rested the control away from the ncaa in the courts.

the ncaa is not like the nfl and schedule games etc....until the play-offs and i don't believe they do a thing with the bowls other than "sanction them"

 

[Zubaz]

And that is exactly my point. Seems easy, but when you break it down and start asking a bunch of what ifs (which WILL always get asked), it gets really, really complicated.

OK, but some minor complication (I don't think that qualifies as "really, really") can't really be considered justification for "Screw it, nobody gets paid at all".

 

[Moose Stuff]

2nd paragraph reads like an advocation for continuing the status quo, which is basically socialism. Are you a socialist?

SMH

 

[Wexahu]

in football, the conferences control their broadcast rights for regular season compensation. been that way since the 80's when the schools rested the control away from the ncaa in the courts.

the ncaa is not like the nfl and schedule games etc....until the play-offs and i don't believe they do a thing with the bowls other than "sanction them"

I know that, but without the NCAA as the organization that governs the sport and ties the whole thing together, I'm not sure how much those conference rights would be worth. I know I personally would be way less interested in the sport if conferences operated independently of the NCAA and each other.