FWST: TCU’s Patterson on Fair Pay to Play Act: Amateur athletics go away if bidding wars start

[Eight]

There is an issue with competitive balance that has always been there and always will, but we still live in a world where a TCU can make a NY6 Bowl, and even has a very outside chance of making the CFP. There is hope, and that is all a supporter, donor, or fan needs. Start opening up payments to players, whether directly or indirectly, and that hope is forever gone. And I know there has always been under the table paying of players but you know what I mean.

College players are required to spend too much time on their sport, I agree with that. Reduce the hours spent....done. That has nothing to do with paying players.

I live in a world where you don't take an action without understanding the consequences of that action. The fairly tale world is the world people live in where you think you can start paying college athletes without having some dire consequences, as in in the end most everyone is in a worse position than they initially were. The supply of big money is in college sports is because of the demand. Start messing with the demand side of the equation and the money is going to disappear.

the only constant is change, not all change is good, but that doesn't mean change could or should be prevented

evolution is the natural process of change to variances in an organisms environment. very rarely do we truly know what brought the change about, when it started, or what will result, but natural history has shown again and again again that an organism can either change or become extinct.

the ncaa and college sports can either evolve and meet the same fate as countless institutions have endured before and will in the future.

 

[Eight]

No, I do. But once it is legal it will be more like the wild west. I agree something should be done but letting the players sell their image to the highest bidder (which is what this will become) isn't the right way. In the larger schools, today's walk ons will become a thing of the past and will be players paid by boosters. Nebraska, Texas and the like in the 1960s had double the players of today that will happen again without some type of control. This isn't about the swimmer giving swimming lessons, no one cares. This is about big bucks. And yes as I said before, it is a myth that the NC is open to all.
What is there to prevent ESPN from promoting the Longhorn network by hiring players to act as commentators?

so because of fear and uncertainty we should do nothing?

we should only act when we have absolute answers?

the world has never worked that way and those that dig in and resist change usually get run over by it.

 

[Wexahu]

so because of fear and uncertainty we should do nothing?

we should only act when we have absolute answers?

the world has never worked that way and those that dig in and resist change usually get run over by it.

The NCAA doesn’t need to do a damn thing except stand their ground. If anything, they should draw a bigger line in the sand.

You sometimes sound like a street agent who is wanting to get in on some action.

 

[Eight]

[QUOTE="Wexahu, post: 2768878, member: 72863"]The NCAA doesn’t need to do a damn thing except stand their ground. If anything, they should draw a bigger line in the sand.

You sometimes sound like a street agent who is wanting to get in on some action.[/QUOTE]

change is undefeated because it is inevitable and if the ncaa does not have the foresight or the survival skills to adapt they will suffer the same fate as other american institutions that held their ground and did not change when it stared them in the face.

 

[Zubaz]

The NCAA doesn’t need to do a damn thing except stand their ground. If anything, they should draw a bigger line in the sand.

It is no guarantee that a court will side with the NCAA on this issue. They might, they might not, they stand to lose big time if the courts rule against them.

The NCAA certainly doesn't have a leg to stand on if identical legislation is passed on a federal level.

"Not doing a damn thing" seems a very foolish proposition considering the issue at hand.

 

[DeuceBoogieNights]

Whats shocking me the most is that a person could defend the NCAA.

 

[LVH]

Patterson is 100% correct here

 

[Wexahu]

Whats shocking me the most is that a person could defend the NCAA.

Yawn. That's kind of the stock answer. People criticize the NCAA for [ Finebaum ] they know nothing about.

 

[DeuceBoogieNights]

Yawn. That's kind of the stock answer. People criticize the NCAA for [ steaming pile of Orgeron ] they know nothing about.

They deserve a lot of criticism. I don't know if players making money from their likeness is the right answer, but Im for anything that will shake up the NCAA. I don't know how you can defend them.

 

[Wexahu]

They deserve a lot of criticism. I don't know if players making money from their likeness is the right answer, but Im for anything that will shake up the NCAA. I don't know how you can defend them.

Why? Just because?

Being the governing body of 1,250+ member schools athletic programs and trying to wade through that while virtually everyone is hell bent on trying to bend or break rules to gain an advantage is hard business. They aren't perfect for sure, but all in all, given the popularity of NCAA sports, they've done a pretty darn good job over the years.

I'm curious, what do you think needs to be shaken up specifically?

 

[GenXFrog]

I'm curious, what do you think needs to be shaken up specifically?

You mean, aside from the NCAA Football Invitational Tournament?

 

[Wexahu]

You mean, aside from the NCAA Football Invitational Tournament?

I'm not sure what you're getting at. The NCAA doesn't have anything to do with the CFP or the Bowl games.

 

[Zubaz]

I'm curious, what do you think needs to be shaken up specifically?

Between this legislation and the now 15+ pages across three different threads on this board discussing said legislation, I think "The players' right to an increased portion of overall revenue" seems to be a common refrain?

I'm not sure what you're getting at. The NCAA doesn't have anything to do with the CFP or the Bowl games.

1) NCAA absolutely regulates the bowl games, otherwise they would have no authority to ban schools from them. Where did you get the idea that they don't?
2) I think @GenXFrog is saying the NCAA should do something about the way the national champion in FBS is determined, rather than their current stance of delegating all authority to the CFP.

 

[Double V]

Aren't the incredible Head Coach salaries due to the incredible $ pouring in from TV....so it's ok for the Coach to make 4-5 million a year because of the money pouring in? An assistant coach makes mucho too. AD's make millions, Chancellor's....etc.....let's face it....the players get full ride and some scrapes but all the rest become multi millionaires.
I don't know how to fairly solve this........

Isn't it already fair? If it wasn't, why do so many young men sign up for the deal?

 

[Wexahu]

Between this legislation and the now 15+ pages across three different threads on this board discussing said legislation, I think "The players' right to an increased portion of overall revenue" seems to be a common refrain?

1) NCAA absolutely regulates the bowl games, otherwise they would have no authority to ban schools from them. Where did you get the idea that they don't?
2) I think @GenXFrog is saying the NCAA should do something about the way the national champion in FBS is determined, rather than their current stance of delegating all authority to the CFP.

Again, if someone can come up with a fair and equal way for players to share income that doesn't interfere with competitive balance and stays within Title IX rules, let's hear it. But this is kind of my point, the issue is WAY WAY WAY more complicated than "just let the kids profit off their likeness, what's the big deal?" People just talk out of their ass without understanding the issues.

I think his "dig" was at the choosing of who gets to play in the CFP, which the NCAA has nothing to do with. And it's comical to suggest that if the NCAA stepped in and ran an FBS football championship that had at-large selections (like in the other Divisions) that will appease people. Good god. So the NCAA is a joke organization that ought to be shaken up.....oh, and by the way, the CFP would be a lot better if the NCAA stepped in and took control of it. Ok, got it.

I stand by my point. Criticizing the NCAA is kind of SOP, but most people who are doing the criticizing don't know what the hell they are even talking about.

 

[Zubaz]

Isn't it already fair? If it wasn't, why do so many young men sign up for the deal?

"The best option I have" != "fair", necessarily. If it were, all those folks dying in unsafe coal mines were treated "fairly" because they "signed up for the deal". You'd have to ignore a host of different factors that go in to that decision, most notably you'd have to ignore the de-facto monopoly power the NCAA has on U-21 American football thanks to anti-trust exemptions for both the NFL and NCAA.

 

[Zubaz]

Again, if someone can come up with a fair and equal way for players to share income that doesn't interfere with competitive balance and stays within Title IX rules, let's hear it.

I think this legislation is going to be a heck of incentive for the NCAA to come up with such a "fair and equal" arrangement, because now the clock is ticking for them. Status quo just isn't going to fly anymore.

I think his "dig" was at the choosing of who gets to play in the CFP, which the NCAA has nothing to do with. And it's comical to suggest that if the NCAA stepped in and ran an FBS football championship that had at-large selections (like in the other Divisions) that will appease people. Good god. So the NCAA is a joke organization that ought to be shaken up.....oh, and by the way, the CFP would be a lot better if the NCAA stepped in and took control of it. Ok, got it.

I have no desire to bring that debate in to this already controversial issue.

 

[Double V]

"The best option I have" != "fair", necessarily. If it were, all those folks dying in unsafe coal mines were treated "fairly" because they "signed up for the deal". You'd have to ignore a host of different factors that go in to that decision, most notably you'd have to ignore the de-facto monopoly power the NCAA has on U-21 American football thanks to anti-trust exemptions for both the NFL and NCAA.

Playing a game is always a choice.

And if you sign up to work in an unsafe coal mine knowing that it's unsafe, that's also your choice. If the company lied about how safe the mine was, that's a different story.

 

[Wexahu]

"The best option I have" != "fair", necessarily. If it were, all those folks dying in unsafe coal mines were treated "fairly" because they "signed up for the deal". You'd have to ignore a host of different factors that go in to that decision, most notably you'd have to ignore the de-facto monopoly power the NCAA has on U-21 American football thanks to anti-trust exemptions for both the NFL and NCAA.

Do you think honestly think revenue being pumped into college sports will remain the same if players are allowed to become, for all intents and purposes, paid professionals who put themselves out for bid?

Just curious, what is a workable solution in your eyes?

 

[Zubaz]

Playing a game is always a choice.

And if you sign up to work in an unsafe coal mine knowing that it's unsafe, that's also your choice.

Wow. Hey while you're back in the 1940's, can you throw some money on IBM for me?

(This totally isn't true, btw. Liability laws and safety regulations exist for a reason.)

Do you think honestly think revenue being pumped into college sports will remain the same if players are allowed to become, for all intents and purposes, paid professionals who put themselves out for bid?

Just curious, what is a workable solution in your eyes?

This goes back to our previous conversation of "Yeah but it'll hurt our business" vs "Your business is based on an unjust arrangement" from the other thread. My position has not changed. The effect on college football is not relevant if you are fixing an injustice. It's then up to the NCAA to figure out a way to maintain given new constraints. Adapt or die, but it's becoming increasingly clear that you can't be a professional-in-everything-but-name football league signing hundred-million dollar TV rights deals, hiring coaches for tens of millions of dollars, building hundred million dollar stadiums, sell millions in tickets to watch kids play, and selling millions in merchandise with star-player's number / likeness on it...and then say "Whoa whoa, you're amateurs" when those players ask for the right to monetize their labor. As I said before, the status quo isn't going to work.