Fair Pay to Play Act

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
That salary is Exhibit A for California...


You dont get to break NCAA rules just cause the state law says you can. NCAA has no obligation to let teams with paid players into March Madness, no?
 

Flywheel

Wait, what year is it?
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
17,891
That salary is Exhibit A for California...


You dont get to break NCAA rules just cause the state law says you can. NCAA has no obligation to let teams with paid players into March Madness, no?
Of course not. And viewers have no obligation to watch March Madness which has no California teams in it, if all the good players go that way for the $.
 

jts1207

Memes posted are not fact checked for accuracy
Joined
Oct 21, 2009
Messages
31,478
Whos going to bankroll the GT strip club sponsors?
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
Of course not. And viewers have no obligation to watch March Madness which has no California teams in it, if all the good players go that way for the $.
People watched March Madness back when the best players were skipping college altogether, why would that change if the California schools literally set up a semipro league?
 

BigDanT

J. Batt Fan
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
11,643
Would this mean I could openly hand out $100 bills at Fan Day to athletes who take pictures with me for using their likeness?

What constitutes an endorsement?

If I wanted to rent a billboard on I-85 advertising my business, could I pay one of our players whatever we agree to and put his picture on it?

Would this get rid of the bagmen?
WE would be the bag men.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
27,277
Yeah idk. I’d assume so. Put I think paying players before they come to a school is still bad.
That’s maybe where the bagmen would come into play. Otherwise, we could promise them a do-nothing job like supervising a building downtown or buy billboards where they would get paid for their likeness.
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,979
Although I'm a big fan of amateurism, I can imagine some version of this rule which would be OK.

What I'm definitely not OK with, is letting the nutjobs who run California dictate collegiate sports policy to the rest of the nation. This is akin to their retarded "something in this product causes cancer" labels and their emissions rules, which all of us get stuck with. California officials are already claiming it would be illegal for the NCAA to prevent Cali schools from engaging in post-season play for violating NCAA rules.

I sure hope the NCAA and the feds push back on yet another California power grab.
 

oldgold68

Bitter old man
Joined
Nov 29, 2018
Messages
598
We get ööööed everytime we give someone $300 so I doubt this is going to make it any worse than it is for us.

It will probably end up in Supreme Court.
Does this mean the NCAA will reinstate our acc championship that was vacated? I'm guessing un-vacate is not a word, but...
 

faujacket

ACC Network Freak
Ban Hammer'd
Joined
Aug 10, 2019
Messages
58
College players are already paid with stipends.

Not to mention about $60,000 cash essentially being in full ride free housing free food.

Bad decision by Cali governor.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
California officials are already claiming it would be illegal for the NCAA to prevent Cali schools from engaging in post-season play for violating NCAA rules.
Wait, they are arguing the NCAA is not allowed to enforce their own rules? I know a basketball team who might be interested in talking to their lawyers...

Even if some loon judge finds the right to March Madness in the Constitution, the NCAA can simply say the punishment for paying a player is X% of the sport's budget. The NCAA will probably choose this because it is the "solution" that makes the NCAA richer.
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
27,979
Wait, they are arguing the NCAA is not allowed to enforce their own rules? I know a basketball team who might be interested in talking to their lawyers...
I believe the argument is that the NCAA is violating antitrust law. No doubt there are other arguments as well.
Even if some loon judge finds the right to March Madness in the Constitution, the NCAA can simply say the punishment for paying a player is X% of the sport's budget. The NCAA will probably choose this because it is the "solution" that makes the NCAA richer.
If a judge says that paid players from Cali are entitled to participate, then the judge would also implicitly be ruling that the NCAA didn't have the authority to penalize the school for letting the player participate.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
I believe the argument is that the NCAA is violating antitrust law. No doubt there are other arguments as well.

If a judge says that paid players from Cali are entitled to participate, then the judge would also implicitly be ruling that the NCAA didn't have the authority to penalize the school for letting the player participate.
If the NCAA is a voluntary organization, no? You think there is merit here?

I think it is antitrust that Augusta National won't let me play their tournament. As a citizen of Sealand, my govt has declared that I am eligible to participate.
 

Flywheel

Wait, what year is it?
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
17,891
People watched March Madness back when the best players were skipping college altogether, why would that change if the California schools literally set up a semipro league?
Because when the best players skip college altogether, it affects everyone equally. Singling out California schools and denying them the postseason would isolate 12% of the US population and 14% of US GDP during the most profitable portion of any sport. That's enough to sting the bottom line of the NCAA even if the idea never spread to other states, which it may.

Or do you think revenue would be unaffected by a deserving PAC-12 champ being passed over for the CFP? History tells us the only reason the CFP exists is because an SEC rematch in the BCS title game drew historically bad ratings.

That's to say nothing of the negative press coverage (to which even the NFL is sensitive over various issues). The NCAA is well within its rights to stonewall Cali over this, but it would not necessarily be wise.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
49,873
Because when the best players skip college altogether, it affects everyone equally.
No, it did not.
Singling out California schools and denying them the postseason would isolate 12% of the US population and 14% of US GDP during the most profitable portion of any sport. That's enough to sting the bottom line of the NCAA even if the idea never spread to other states, which it may.
There is no evidence that the Cali schools not being present would correspond to a 12% drop in revenue. I would bet any amount of money the impact would be far, far below 12%. AND, March Madness is split back out, so less participation for Cali just means more money for everyone else.

Or do you think revenue would be unaffected by a deserving PAC-12 champ being passed over for the CFP?
Yes any slight decline would be more than offset.
History tells us the only reason the CFP exists is because an SEC rematch in the BCS title game drew historically bad ratings. That's to say nothing of the negative press coverage (to which even the NFL is sensitive over various issues).
This isnt filthy rich players bashing the USA and Americans, dude. I think most people will side with the NCAA here bigtime that college should remain "amateur" and that pro sports should be pro. I dont think many people will actually side with California. We shall see.
 

midatlantech

Dodd-Like
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
6,680
It also happens to be a great opportunity for Trump to go after Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida , Virginia, NC and Michigan football fans. The timing is perfect.

The problem is going to split conferences however. The ACC will have to drop BC and SU very soon.
 
Top