Brog
Full Member
Ding! Ding! Ding! Award for most ridiculous statement ever on KFrogs!
Diehards: Deante Gray calls debate over paying players ‘laughable’ after NCAA earnings report
- Thread starter TopFrog
- Start date
Ding! Ding! Ding! Award for most ridiculous statement ever on KFrogs!
What is amusing about his opinion is the fact that the NCAA makes the vast majority of their money from college BASKETBALL (March Madness especially). Like 80% of their annual revenue.
In 2018, the NCAA will receive $857 million for March Madness broadcast rights.
College football rights are struck with CONFERENCES, the NCAA is not involved.
Last I checked, Deante Gray did not play basketball.
In 2018, the NCAA will receive $857 million for March Madness broadcast rights.
College football rights are struck with CONFERENCES, the NCAA is not involved.
Last I checked, Deante Gray did not play basketball.
Zubaz
Member
Well....no, it isn't. That's kinda the point. The NFL has an antitrust exemption and currently has (I believe exclusive) contracts with every major broadcast network in the country protected by that exemption. They limit the participation of their member-teams through the NFLPA's requirement that you be three years out of high school. That's a restriction on a capitalist market.
Further, the no football is allowed to be broadcast on television on Fridays or Saturdays in the Fall within a certain radius of any high school or college game being played (this is why the NFL playoffs don't play on Saturday until AFTER the college season is over). That's part of the NFL's antitrust compromise that helps the NCAA and high school football, but cripples any attempt at competiton. Again, restriction on a capitalist market.
Even further, courts have pretty consistently ruled that NCAA players are ineligible to form a union at both public and private colleges, meaning whatever you think of collective bargaining or Unions in general, they are not afforded the same privileges that a professional ballplayer is allowed.
So yes, technically, anyone can start a league that would theoretically allow under 21 players. That's what we're seeing Vince McMahon try right now with the revival of the XFL in the spring. But in addition to the MASSIVE barriers to entry that any new league faces, the deck is already stacked against them from a regulatory standpoint.
DickBumpastache
Active Member
So you’d pay the same prices to watch a game full of walk-ons? And TV networks would do the same?
Why aren’t D3 schools killing it in the ratings then?
Yeah it's so horrible that thousands of kids hold signing-day ceremonies and parties each year. Something doesn't add up. You don't want to play football (or any other college sport) because you don't get "paid?" Fine. Don't accept the scholarship offer. Yes, you do have that choice.
Next man up.
Next man up.
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying. The NCAA is an organization that governs amateur collegiate athletics. If you are no longer an amateur you can't compete in their events. That's what this is about. The NCAA isn't keeping any kid from doing anything, they are just saying if you do x and y, you are no longer eligible to compete in our events. How much the NCAA makes or doesn't make is irrelevant.
That's the point. NOBODY IS TURNING DOWN THE SCHOLARSHIP OFFERS! If the deal was so horrible, why do they all accept it?
Because nobody cares about D3 sports. Nobody would care about D3 sports no matter who was playing in them. It's the school logo and university that draws the fans, not the players. Put a bunch of D3 athletes in P5 school uniforms and the stands would still be full. Put a bunch of 5-star recruits in Cameron University uniforms and nobody would care.
Zubaz
Member
The point is the NCAA has either benefited from or advocated for market-warping antitrust policies that prevent competition from popping up. This isn't an accusation, it's literally the basis for the antitrust exemption the NFL receives. Those policies, some of which they are directly responsible for, pretty much make them the only option for under 21 football players.
To be clear, that's not the only reason that another league hasn't popped up, but you can't just shrug your shoulders and go "that's capitalism" when you have a monopolistic entity in the equation.
cheese83
Full Member
The reason lots of kids get steered into another major is simply bc they aren’t smart enough. You can be a student athlete and have a business or science major. It’s just more and more rare in the revenue generating sports.
Plenty of people who swam, play soccer, track, etc., did it.
FTR I’m all for the kids in football and basketball getting paid. They sell out giant stadiums and bring in tons of $. It’s the minor leagues for the NFL and NBA. The only issue as Moose described was how and how much?
flyfishingfrog
Active Member
Really - what is ridiculous about it? Do you know our level of academic giving was before athletic success? Do you know what it is now? The growth curve after inflation is almost directly in line with the timeline for success in football and accelerates in line with success in other sports
Ask Don Whelan if you don’t think it’s the main driver
The fact that Victor has turned that money into new buildings and better teachers or that we are more selective because of more applications is the result - not the driver of the increase in position and stature
DickBumpastache
Active Member
Why are there so many sweatshop workers if the conditions are so horrible?
DickBumpastache
Active Member
Really? The school logo and university draws the fans? Wonder why so many schools are having problems selling seats then, even with the best athletes playing. Also wonder why CFB wasn't mainstream at all until the advent of the professional leagues. And I wonder why the jersey numbers that get sold are always of the star players wearing them.
I'm dying laughing at the image of someone watching a game and thinking, "I wouldn't be watching this if it weren't for the school's outstanding pre-law program." Yeah, it's definitely the university that keeps 'em coming back.
Mean Purple
Active Member
Goes even further than the issue you, flyfishingfrog and others raise (which are great points.) There is one part that none of the sports radio guys ever think of. TITLE IX.
Title IX would surely be brought up if they went down the road of paying players. How much are they going to pay the ladies?
Easier said than done.
Also, if they are getting paid, does that mean they come off scholy? Maybe Diante and others should talke a look at the cost of their college education and be thankful.
If they really want to fix some issues, let players go to the pros out of high school. Have the NFL set up a minor league. NFL benefits from player development in the College ranks. Come to think of it, those players in college benefit from that as well, as they try to go pro. So does that mean schools send a bill to the players?
There aren't in the U.S. I'm not talking about college football in Sri Lanka.
Edit: Also, nobody holds a press conference and throws a party for getting a job in a sweatshop...
They are having trouble selling seats in the stadium because I can sit in the A/C on my comfy couch, with a cold beer in my hand and whatever food I want to eat (sans-ridiculous markup), watching the game in HD on my huge TV. Costs me $0 in gas, $0 for parking, $0 for tickets, and during commercials I can switch to watch other games live. College football obviously does not have a fan consumption shortage, get a better argument.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
I could have sworn I saw something a while back about someone trying to start up a pro league for HS kids who would rather do that than go to college.
cheese83
Full Member
I think you're seeing the "brand" matter more in college basketball these days. With all the one and done guys at schools like Duke, UK, UNC, etc., there isn't even a chance to really get to know the big time stars. They "go to school" for about 8 months and then leave. At least the NBA has a D league. But once you get into the D league unless you were drafted the pay sucks, think it comes in around $25k/yr plus housing costs. If you give kids the option to either go straight to the NBA or try to sign on a D League team vs. playing in college for a free scholarship I think over time the majority of players would end up picking college vs. the minors. Sure the big time studs would go pro and get paid but that's basically the one & done guys or kids who don't want to go to school. Then they'd end up getting totally screwed in the end without earning a degree or anything.
Kind of feels like college baseball has been trending that way the last 10 or so years. Why go grind it out in single A ball with limited resources living in a crappy town when you could go to a school like UT or TCU with tons of co-eds, sweet dorms, parties, and still have a good shot at making the MLB.
DickBumpastache
Active Member
The activity is not the comparison; the choice is.
And what is the obsession with the 'party'? How many people even have parties?
TV was just invented in the last 2-3 years?
BTW ratings this season were down so that argument doesn't hold water either: https://www.si.com/tech-media/2017/12/10/college-footballs-declining-ratings-2017-media-circus
WhatTheFrog
Active Member
Man, some of y'all are a beating in this thread.
