Time to start treating college players like contracted employees

[TopFrog]

Too much investment in them only to have team up and leave with no compensation.

They are no longer student-athletes, though their scholarship is part of the incentive and financial package.

Transfers should be limited, and a school that picks up a player who has received NIL benefits should have to pay that school a portion of those funds, like a buyout. Some kind of consideration.

I know this won't be popular but it has to be reigned in somehow and schools treated fairly and able to recover and protect their investments.

Thoughts? Other ideas to bring this somewhat under control?

Moderator Edit: Please note that the title of this thread has been updated.

 

[Endless Purple]

Too much investment in them only to have team up and leave with no compensation.

They are no longer student-athletes, though their scholarship is part of the incentive and financial package.

Transfers should be limited, and a school that picks up a player who has received NIL benefits should have to pay that school a portion of those funds, like a buyout. Some kind of consideration.

I know this won't be popular but it has to be reigned in somehow and schools treated fairly and able to recover and protect their investments.

Thoughts? Other ideas to bring this somewhat under control?

The first school does not pay the NIL so why should the second school have to pay it back to the first?

Also if a NFL player gets traded, the second team does not need to pay back the advertising dollars the player earned to the agents or ad agencies.

What needs to happen is the NIL needs to be treated like it was allowed for. An opportunity for a player to earn money outside of school, not the pay-for-play that it currently is. Technically that would still be against the rules.

 

[hometown frog]

uhhh, don’t think you should ever call people property. Like ever ever….

 

[Brevity Frog]

Title makes me tense

 

[tmcats]

the emancipation proclamation was sometime ago.

 

[TxFrog1999]

Want me to change that phrasing to "employees" or "contract employees"?

 

[Sangria Wine]

The one year sit out rule was fine. Let them leave without sitting out if their head coach, coordinator or position coach leaves…or if they’ve graduated and have eligibility left…not just to make a payday.

I’m all for athletes getting some coin, but the total lack of control will cause a lot of problems over time. The NFL has a salary cap, they have enforceable contracts, they have free agency rules, etc. All those rules are agreeable to the athletes and also to the franchises. The NIL and NCAA is just the Wild Wild West.

 

[tmcats]

Want me to change that phrasing to "employees" or "contract employees"?

calling for players to be treated like property is cringe worthy.

 

[hometown frog]

The one year sit out rule was fine. Let them leave without sitting out if their head coach, coordinator or position coach leaves…or if they’ve graduated and have eligibility left…not just to make a payday.

I’m all for athletes getting some coin, but the total lack of control will cause a lot of problems over time. The NFL has a salary cap, they have enforceable contracts, they have free agency rules, etc. All those rules are agreeable to the athletes and also to the franchises. The NIL and NCAA is just the Wild Wild West.

Tend to agree w your suggestions. I just hope they make small adjustments and allow things to stabilize between moves. Think the thrashing around w wildly changing rules can only make this worse.

I think the number of transfers by player and the portal calendar windows are the two biggest items to correct first.

 

[TxFrog1999]

Thread Title edited.

 

[TopFrog]

Pro players are properties of their team. Get over your woke selves when you know the context of the reference. How about responding to the idea good or bad.

 

[Sangria Wine]

I think the number of transfers by player and the portal calendar windows are the two biggest items to correct first.

I agree with that. I’d almost like access to entering the transfer portal not to start until the day after their current university plays their last game/bowl game. One free transfer without sitting out and after that make it punitive…maybe they have to sit out a year AND they lose that year of eligibility if they transfer a second time through the portal.

Rich jock sniffers will never learn the lesson and stop feeding the beast. It’ll take some form of NCAA oversight to make any impact. I’d like to think differently but egos know no bounds.

 

[hometown frog]

I agree with that. I’d almost like access to entering the transfer portal not to start until the day after their current university plays their last game/bowl game. One free transfer without sitting out and after that make it punitive…maybe they have to sit out a year AND they lose that year of eligibility if they transfer a second time through the portal.

Rich jock sniffers will never learn the lesson and stop feeding the beast. It’ll take some form of NCAA oversight to make any impact. I’d like to think differently but egos know no bounds.

Prob with waiting until the end of their current teams last game is that totally conflicts with the academic calendars. So I really don’t have a good answer. id say let them register for their new school but still allow them to remain with their current team until their season ends, but that sounds like a terrible idea to me. If you don’t allow waivers, you basically prevent spring transfers out of teams that make it to bowl games or playoffs.

 

[East Coast]

Before you go back to the one year waiting period after a transfer, you need to limit the number of players on scholarship for the entire year. Currently, you only have to be at 85 at the beginning of fall camp (and for the entire playing season), so schools over sign and then cut kids. As of this weekend, we have 95 (per someone on 247 sports whom I trust) on scholarship. That means at least 10 cuts, as the kids that really wanted to leave have already done so.

 

[Sangria Wine]

If you don’t allow waivers, you basically prevent spring transfers out of teams that make it to bowl games or playoffs.

Call me crazy, but I actually don’t mind that being the case. Transferring shouldn’t happen without it hurting a little bit. Let them leave their school in May at the end of the semester and enroll for Summer at their new school. Otherwise just leave before the start of the season and sit out a year not in school anywhere. Quitting on your teammates with games left to play is a punk move in my book. It should be a two way street and the system should not encourage transferring through extraordinarily soft transfer rules.

 

[Sangria Wine]

As of this weekend, we have 95 (per someone on 247 sports whom I trust) on scholarship. That means at least 10 cuts, as the kids that really wanted to leave have already done so.

An equally punk move as the guys leaving with games left to play. The whole system needs a slap on the neck. Two way street and just do what’s right by both the players and the program.

 

[Chongo94]

calling for players to be treated like property is cringe worthy.

I see you’re new to TopFrog….

 

[Limey Frog]

 

[Limey Frog]

In defense of whatever this thread was called before everyone wet themselves and it was changed, when was the last time anyone had a little conniption fit over references to professional franchises "trading" a player? No one ever says "trade the rights player X's contract," that's too cumbersome. You know what they mean when they say "trade player X". In soccer its even more direct. There are transfer fees to acquire players from a club he's still under contract with. Everyone refers to that as "buying/selling a player". I never heard anyone melt down over that. Quit being so pedantic and self-righteous.

To the substantive point of the OP, we need collective bargaining with a player's association, revenue sharing from TV money, and reclassify players as student-workers. I'm sure that transition would be a huge logistical headache, but they players generate the money and they should be the ones who earn it. What football is becoming in order to avoid those changes is something that won't even be worth watching. Right now you can't even predict who will play for what school next week.

 

[Chongo94]

In defense of whatever this thread was called before everyone wet themselves and it was changed, when was the last time anyone had a little conniption fit over references to professional franchises "trading" a player? No one ever says "trade the rights player X's contract," that's too cumbersome. You know what they mean when they say "trade player X". In soccer its even more direct. There are transfer fees to acquire players from a club he's still under contract with. Everyone refers to that as "buying/selling a player". I never heard anyone melt down over that. Quit being so pedantic and self-righteous.

To the substantive point of the OP, we need collective bargaining with a player's association, revenue sharing from TV money, and reclassify players as student-workers. I'm sure that transition would be a huge logistical headache, but they players generate the money and they should be the ones who earn it. What football is becoming in order to avoid those changes is something that won't even be worth watching. Right now you can't even predict who will play for what school next week.

Well, to be fair, those players are still professional and have some agency over themselves and their contracts despite what the language of the deal makes it seem like.

College players do not due to various issues. And again, the difference is college vs pro, which is not something I want to debate here as it has been done so already ad nauseam.

You can make the argument you do above and you have some good points but at the end of the day, these kids are still college kids and using the phrasing originally used is incredibly obtuse.