Hmmm… I wonder what the decisions of the Big Ten and Pac-12 to pull the plug on the 2020 football season might have in common. Let’s see.
I think you misspelled “will not” there, Larry, but point taken.
When they tell you it’s about the money, believe them.
18 responses to “Doin’ it for the business model.”
I get that the schools cannot impose a bubble on the players, but can they not provide a bubble opportunity and let the players decide whether to comply or not? From the comments of Saban and Courson, it sounds like those players are in a de facto bubble now. The players are not stupid; they realize if there is an outbreak, especially now, they will not have a season. They have a strong incentive to wear masks and maintain social distancing. UGA already provides a basket of online classes to all students. Why not allow the players to take sufficient classes online this fall (as long as same is offered to all students)?
Once classes and rush start, we may well have a spike, so maybe this is hopeless. I also know it is optimistic for a bunch of 18-22 year olds plus staff to voluntarlily self isolate for four months, but isn’t it worth trying?
Of course they can impose a bubble. That’s what Georgia’s been doing with the team since the players reported back.
They choose not to once students return, because they’ve decided that upholding the amateurism model is their top priority.
You really are on a crusade. I do admire that and you are an intelligent guy. We all agree there is a lot of work that needs to be done to improve the equity in collegiate athletics. You’ve firmly established that. But just ask Nick Chubb or Tim Worley who had it best. Just ask Fridge or Trevor who has more of everything. Ask the violinist in the music program if they would like what football players have. Can you please answer my question:
Young men play football in high school. When they graduate they have choices. Get a job. Go to college. Go to college and compete in athletics and get the very best of everything paid for including a monthly stipend. Skip college and train for 3 years. Or live off parents. They have a choice. Personal responsibility. Where am I missing your point.
How is making a voluntary choice being exploited?
Again. Didn’t answer the question. It is worth more. Food, housing, healthcare, monthly stipend. And I would add life insurance and health insurance for life. Travel benefits for parents. Increase the stipend. Look at some sort of shared NIL fund. But you didn’t answer the question. I can handle the truth.
It’s a loaded question. Baked into it is the assumption that what the players have is as good as it gets. If so, then sure, no exploitation.
But it’s not so. Here’s my question to answer your question: if amateurism were abolished tomorrow, would any college athletes see an increase in their compensation from what it is now? If the answer to that is yes — and of course it is — then those players are being exploited.
Would any see less in that scenario?
Well, Derek, let me ask you something: did any see less after the COA stipend, which many proclaimed would gut college football’s balance, was instituted?
I’m gonna take a wild guess and say that schools will cut waterfalls, bowling alleys, barber shops and $10k lockers before considering your concerns.
One more thing: your question doesn’t address whether any players are exploited.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ding, ding, ding … the market comp is on the athletic association’s balance sheet in the form of property, plant and equipment (depreciated over a number of years) rather than on the income statement as a period expense. Read the cash flow statement of these entities if you really want to understand their ability to support more than the status quo.
IMO “no” because no competing entity is offering more (anything) for their services. When your value is unique to the colleges and the only reason they would offer a great player more would be to steer them away from their competitors its a pretty unique “job” market that isn’t replicated anywhere else.
What do kids get paid to play high school football?
Look at the oppression inherent in the system!
What would Valdosta pay a star player to come if they could?
I wouldn’t think “because the NCAA has been successful in illegally restricting the labor market” is the best lede here, but what do I know?
I would say for the vast majority of players, a free education from an esteemed institute of higher learning (and/or Florida) , would be sufficient. As a Mercer alum, I know how expensive tuition is. BTW, we almost scored a field goal on Bama.!
The stars are a different situation entirely. I certainly don’t know the solution. College football and basketball have been doing a slow suicide for a while now. Please refer to the NASCAR model. Greed is NOT good.
Scotty, you’ve hit the nail on the head. I would tweak your comment a bit. For some players, their NIL is worth more than others. If the NCAA had the foresight to reform itself after EA settled the video game lawsuit, we wouldn’t be having these issues now.
If they had the good sense not to take EA sports’ money in the first place.
Oh wait, you were serious? You had not, take, and money in the same sentence.
It would have been smarter for the NCAA and the schools not to have used everything but the players’ names in the game. Georgia RB #3 who just happened to be from Tarboro, North Carolina … what a coincidence!
Rod Schmurley on dynasty mode was a beast !
And for some teams as well. I think it is an A +/* B = c (Total NIL value)