HToady
Full Member
I wonder if small spectator sports like rifle, equestrian, and beach volleyball, should get the same equation as football, basketball and baseball. Is that a lawsuit in the making?
The House Settlement (Officially Paying Players)
- Thread starter TxFrog1999
- Start date
froglash88
Full Member
I think that the revenue should be shared where the sports that bring in the most money, like football and basketball, should earn the most money. However, I don’t think it should be proportional to how it comes in. I think smaller percentages should go to the other sports, even if those sports don’t make money. I think taking care of the other sports (so they survive) is important because it adds to the overall college experience for the students and alums from a given school.
Ironically, I think Grant House’s efforts will end up causing several “Olympic” sports, including swimming, to be cut from a large number of athletic departments.
Ironically, I think Grant House’s efforts will end up causing several “Olympic” sports, including swimming, to be cut from a large number of athletic departments.
tmcats
Active Member
i would surmise that those kinds of sports would be at risk due to their cash cost to the department(s). the obvious lawsuit in waiting is title 9 when schools start shelling out 90% of their "house" budget to football and mbb. my guess is that this will be specifically addressed by the pending congressional codification, or it will not stand in court.
BrewingFrog
Was I supposed to type something here?
To this I would simply say, the NCAA didn't bother enforcing the rules on the Big Programs even though they had a number of them dead to rights. After all, can't upset the Gravy Train. Auburn got caught, so Boise State is going on probation again...
Whatever "rules" there are, the SEC/B1G/ESPN will break the hell out of them. And the "enforcement" outfit will go ahead and let them, because the Big Conferences pay the bills.
tmcats
Active Member
this is why many of us hope "house" is codified by congress. i don't believe the will wades of college sports will be quite so quick if breaking federal law with all that entails. as for the ncaa, it is essentially gone with establishment of this new enforcement entity - college sports commission.
An-Cap Frog
Member
The rule of law is a myth...
tmcats
Active Member
well, that's profound.
So is the idea that if we had no government or laws that we'd have a functioning society.
An-Cap Frog
Member
California has laws, how's that going right now?
An-Cap Frog
Member
Are you certain that there will be enforcement of a cap?
tmcats
Active Member
that's really a rhetorical question. are you certain there won't be enforcement? i mean is there enforcement against murders? the move to codify house is important, imho.
An-Cap Frog
Member
We paid players before it was legal, the colleges now get to self-report. I am sure that all football programs will adhere to this.
tmcats
Active Member
thus the need to codify house rather than leave it to the college sports commission.We paid players before it was legal, the colleges now get to self-report. I am sure that all football programs will adhere to this.
An-Cap Frog
Member
You can only imagine why the sporting community would be skeptical of any promise of enforcement.
A lot better than if they had no laws.
An-Cap Frog
Member
Laws are subjective and are selectively enforced and the enforcement of any cap on what is paid to players will be dictated by those in power. Would we ever see Ohio State receive the death penalty or is that reserved for the SMUs and the Boise State's of the world?
tmcats
Active Member
laws that focus on facts and the "reasonable citizen" standard are in fact objective, not subjective. as to ohio state, i have not seen them in on the cheat sheet.
froglash88
Full Member
Tressel's OSU tenure, however, came to an abrupt end with his resignation in May 2011 amidst an NCAA investigation into improper benefits violations involving OSU football players during the 2010 season. The investigation resulted in OSU self-vacating victories from the 2010 season including the 2011 Sugar Bowl.
An-Cap Frog
Member
That standard is not strictly defined, which means it can be molded to support multiple, even opposing, interpretations in court. Reasonableness is subjective and often shaped by the biases of both the judge and the jury. Would you agree that "Free Speech" largely has different definitions in the US versus the UK, but both are based on a "reasonable citizen" standard? Do you think a commissioner who graduated from Ohio State or Texas would be truly neutral? What if they were ruling on Michigan or Oklahoma? Could they even give the appearance of neutrality? In most cases, lawyers and judges can find precedent to support opposing interpretations of a rule. Why would it be any different when a ruling against a program falls outside the established norms of college athletics?
