California passes "Fair Pay to Play Act" bill, which would make it possible for college athletes to accept endorsement money

JealousKenny

Member
Jul 17, 2018
1,138
next up: make universities pay their student athletes.
That would be a lot more difficult as someone would then need to determine which non revenue sports would need to be eliminated as the football and basketball money would be used to pay athletes instead of funding other sports.

Would you like to tell the women's volleyball team they need to disband because the school needs to pay the defensive linemen?
 

TheMan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,198
I think endorsements might be the fairest way to have student athletes get paid. Obviously lacrosse or some shit is never going to bring in money so it doesn't make sense to pay them. But, it would be unfair if schools paid football or basketball players and not anyone else. Endorsements? The market decides and pays the best players. Hell even a Lacrosse player could get payed if they are behind a success story or some shit.
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
I think endorsements might be the fairest way to have student athletes get paid. Obviously lacrosse or some shit is never going to bring in money so it doesn't make sense to pay them. But, it would be unfair if schools paid football or basketball players and not anyone else. Endorsements? The market decides and pays the best players. Hell even a Lacrosse player could get payed if they are behind a success story or some shit.
This is not the market deciding, this is still all the schools colluding together to not pay their workforce, just being slightly less assholes if those kids make money from a side gig (and think of the nerves of the NCAA to even demand that they don't do that).

I think everyone should get paid minimum wage, above that, I'm fine with letting the market decide how much does a five star QB recruit is worth for schools. I'm gonna guess the answer is slightly above a cost of a scholarship.
 

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Nov 14, 2017
6,798
That would be a lot more difficult as someone would then need to determine which non revenue sports would need to be eliminated as the football and basketball money would be used to pay athletes instead of funding other sports.

Would you like to tell the women's volleyball team they need to disband because the school needs to pay the defensive linemen?
Big money college sports subsidize the smaller sports, the exorbitant salaries of coaching/athletic staff, and make the University a healthy profit. This isn't an either/or situation, and any school that tried to paint it as such should be rightfully raked over the coals.

Paying 100 kids $15/hr (hypothetically) isn't going to wipe out Michigan's $12 billion endowment. The football team by itself makes an estimated $125 million per year, $75 million of which is pure profit: https://www.wxyz.com/sports/michigan-the-third-most-valuable-college-football-team-in-the-country
 

ccbfan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
703
Paying a football player minimum wage is akin to paying them nothing. They get a larger stipend than that already. (Few hundred a month)

Especially when you consider a football player technically only works for 3-4 hours a week.
 
OP
OP
Neece

Neece

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,405
Paying a football player minimum wage is akin to paying them nothing. They get a larger stipend than that already. (Few hundred a month)

Especially when you consider a football player technically only works for 3-4 hours a week.
Practice, meetings, and flights aren't work?
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,148
I think endorsements might be the fairest way to have student athletes get paid. Obviously lacrosse or some shit is never going to bring in money so it doesn't make sense to pay them. But, it would be unfair if schools paid football or basketball players and not anyone else. Endorsements? The market decides and pays the best players. Hell even a Lacrosse player could get payed if they are behind a success story or some shit.
It depends on the school. X school may not have a good football team but they have the top girls soccer team in the country. So then that school donors would be paying girls soccer players etc or their rival donors could give endorsements to take the players away etc

There are plenty of sports that are big time but don’t get shown on TV
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
Paying a football player minimum wage is akin to paying them nothing. They get a larger stipend than that already. (Few hundred a month)

Especially when you consider a football player technically only works for 3-4 hours a week.
If the school stopped colluding to suppress athletes wages, many of them will make way way more than minimum wage.
Minimum wage is just the floor it should be illegal to pay them below.

Also, being a college football player is a full time job.
 

ccbfan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
703
If the school stopped colluding to suppress athletes wages, many of them will make way way more than minimum wage.
Minimum wage is just the floor it should be illegal to pay them below.

Also, being a college football player is a full time job.
Major schools would love to be able to pay top football and basketball players. Why do you think there so many recruiting violations, fake jobs for blue chip families, ect. They just can’t legally afford to do it because of title 9.

Practice, meetings, and flights aren't work?
Of course they are. Doesn’t mean some schools won’t try to weasel out of it. Plenty of work places have unpaid training, conferences and travel. Practice and meetings can become non mandatory. Good luck getting into a game if you don’t go.
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
Major schools would love to be able to pay top football and basketball players. Why do you think there so many recruiting violations, fake jobs for blue chip families, ect. They just can’t legally afford to do it because of title 9.
Title IX does not prevent schools from paying athletes. It's perfectly legal to pay them (in fact, I am unsure how it is legal to not pay them, but that's a different story).
The schools literally colluded together and said no one will play any school that pay their aesthetes.

If USC decided to start paying paying their football team tomorrow, the feds are not gonna come and arrest the AD or anything. But the NCAA will sanction them out of competition.
It's collusion to suppress wages, plain and simple, and if all the schools stopped doing it (or let's be real, be made to stop doing ti) a lot of of those athletes are gonna get paid a whole lot of money.
 

ccbfan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
703
Title IX does not prevent schools from paying athletes. It's perfectly legal to pay them (in fact, I am unsure how it is legal to not pay them, but that's a different story).
The schools literally colluded together and said no one will play any school that pay their aesthetes.

If USC decided to start paying paying their football team tomorrow, the feds are not gonna come and arrest the AD or anything. But the NCAA will sanction them out of competition.
It's collusion to suppress wages, plain and simple, and if all the schools stopped doing it (or let's be real, be made to stop doing ti) a lot of of those athletes are gonna get paid a whole lot of money.
There’s a reason why I used the term legally afford.

Major schools can pay their revenue generating players heck many try to do it secretly. That same USC you mention secretly tried to pay their top players got caught and penalized and lost a national championship because of it.

Most though can’t afford to pay all their student athletes what top football players are worth. Which title 9 would require.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,974
It is my understanding that collegiate athletics generates profit and they should be paid out of that profit. Is there something I'm missing here?
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
There’s a reason why I used the term legally afford.

Major schools can pay their revenue generating players heck many try to do it secretly. That same USC you mention secretly tried to pay their top players got caught and penalized and lost a national championship because of it.

Most though can’t afford to pay all their student athletes what top football players are worth. Which title 9 would require.
Title IX does not require pay equality.
Duke doesn't pay Joanne McCallie. the same salary as Coach K.
You can argue that it should, but it's not how the government and the courts interpret it.

Seriously, they just don't want to play their workforce because they're greedy assholes.
 

ccbfan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
703
Title IX does not require pay equality.
Duke doesn't pay Joanne McCallie. the same salary as Coach K.
You can argue that it should, but it's not how the government and the courts interpret it.

Seriously, they just don't want to play their workforce because they're greedy assholes.
Title 9 specifically states all athlete regardless of gender have the have the same benefits.

 

Dude Abides

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,960
Most though can’t afford to pay all their student athletes what top football players are worth. Which title 9 would require.
No it wouldn’t.

Title 9 specifically states all athlete regardless of gender have the have the same benefits.

No, it doesn't. This is just the NCAA summary of a DoE regulation. Its silly to think it would be the same in the event the NCAA ceased being an exploitative cartel and players became employees.
 
Last edited:

Acorn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,513
Scotland
Good, these kids have been taken advantage of. They are putting their health on the line for nothing, they can't profit off their labour but everyone else can.
 

Evan

Member
Oct 27, 2017
765
I wish players were paid in some way legally, but this will just give more power to the bigger schools.
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
Title 9 specifically states all athlete regardless of gender have the have the same benefits.

Fuck the NCAA and their FAQs, this is the text of Title IX -

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
You can argue that the use here of "benefits" means equal pay, but NCAA argued in court that it isn't when women coaches sued them for equal pay. And they won.
So far, the courts haven't agreed with you, for example, the USWNT, which is most certainly an activity receiving federal financial assistance, is getting paid waaaaaaaay less than their men counterparts.

This is just an NCAA talking point, it's bullshit, it's not that they can't pay, it's that they don't want to.
 

ObiWan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,031
Los Angeles
It is my understanding that collegiate athletics generates profit and they should be paid out of that profit. Is there something I'm missing here?
Nope. It’s literally that.

Student athletes should have a union. But thanks to garbage loopholes the NCAA says they aren’t “employees” and therefor not required to be paid. It makes as much sense as the NCAA being classified “non-profit.”
 
Oct 28, 2017
4,035
I think endorsements might be the fairest way to have student athletes get paid. Obviously lacrosse or some shit is never going to bring in money so it doesn't make sense to pay them. But, it would be unfair if schools paid football or basketball players and not anyone else. Endorsements? The market decides and pays the best players. Hell even a Lacrosse player could get payed if they are behind a success story or some shit.
How do you feel about coaches being pads millions while professors get a fraction?
 

Ron Paul

It's Happening
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
6,850
Texas
Unpaid internships, which also heavily rely on college students to fill, need to be changed as well. Too many companies take advantage of unpaid labor from college students, without even offering them jobs when they're finished.
 

crazyfunster

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,639
If the NCAA yeeted CA, but CA paid its players, you'd see a lot of top players go to CA. The programs would probably end up being more talented than Clemson instead of having the talent of Duke.

College basketball kids would flock to CA. If there's not enough for the PAC12, there's the mid-majors. You got Mark Gottfried at Northridge, he'd find a way to cheat. College baseball might as well, especially since they don't get full rides.

Uber is also fighting this, claiming drivers aren't core to their business, which is laughable.
 
Oct 27, 2017
12,588
Seattle
It would cripple an entire Power 5 conference.
I agree, without the California schools, the pac-12 would have a hard time justifying a P5 exemption. I could see Oregon and Washington having the clout to land in other power 5 conferences

Losing the Trojans would definitely hurt
Maybe, But college football is driven by the likes of Clemson and the SEc the past decade.

Today maybe. But what when the top talents decide to go to Californian teams because they can make money while in college. It can cause a big shift in teams.
What money are they going to make if the NCAA kicks them out (not saying they could or would), just hypothetically speaking. What kind of endorsements are you going to get if you are not playing on a new year’s bowl game?
 

Corran Horn

Member
Oct 25, 2017
849
What money are they going to make if the NCAA kicks them out (not saying they could or would), just hypothetically speaking. What kind of endorsements are you going to get if you are not playing on a new year’s bowl game?
NCAA kicking them out would jumpstart the end of the NCAA. Colleges don't need the NCAA and the power 5 could easily create their own thing. They could bowl ban Californian teams I guess but you will still get plenty of exposure/endorsements without that.
 

CNoodles

Member
Mar 7, 2019
150
Athletes already get paid big money. They get a free education, living space, food, suits, shoes...... the list goes on and on. The real problem is the sport is making millions and its only going to coaches and chairmen and not being put back into the school. So many people could go to college for free if all the money being made was put back into the school.
 

OuterLimits

Member
Nov 2, 2017
941
This could get interesting. NCAA is threatening to ban any California colleges from participating in the playoffs and I suppose other bowl games.
 

Vas

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,016
College Athletics is like one of those things that the less you think about how exploitative it is, the better. It's like Sumo. Sumo is horribly exploitative and tantamount to indentured servitude in 2019. Maybe there's something appealing about the spartan conditions in which young aspiring sumo train, until you hear how their seniors abuse them. Finally came to a head when a kid was literally beaten to death by his seniors in 2007.
 

Chikor

Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,082
Unpaid internships, which also heavily rely on college students to fill, need to be changed as well. Too many companies take advantage of unpaid labor from college students, without even offering them jobs when they're finished.
We just need to enforce the rules we already have on the books.
Those things are not really legal, we just let companies get away with that because PrO bUsInEsS.
 

Stinkles

343 Industries
Verified
Oct 25, 2017
14,875
Good, the NCAA can piss off


This should show you everything that's wrong with the NCAA. For anyone who doesn't know, that's Nick Saban, head coach of Alabama's football team. They've been the most successful college football team for at least the last decade. He's made an assload of money during his time as coach. If a player did this exact same ad, they would lost their eligibility.
wasnt he specifically the highest paid employee in all of Alabama?

yup! state and overall. alabama, this is your zenith apparently. https://www.al.com/news/2018/04/nick_saban_is_countrys_highest.html


kentuckys is the ceo of the kentucky derby. of course it is.
 

Josh5890

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
1,951
I have no problem with a college not paying a student outside of their scholarship and any benefits that come wit it.

I also have no problem with a student-athlete profiting off of their own likeness and making money on their own. The NCAA should allow that but of course they drag their feet.
 

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Nov 14, 2017
6,798
Athletes already get paid big money. They get a free education, living space, food, suits, shoes...... the list goes on and on. The real problem is the sport is making millions and its only going to coaches and chairmen and not being put back into the school. So many people could go to college for free if all the money being made was put back into the school.
And then you get injured, lose your scholarship, and the school throws you aside like so much refuse. You of course can't hold a real job for spending money or pursue other cultured interests during the school year because of the time and travel commitment. Or more commonly, you squeeze through with a C- average taking joke level classes and have no real marketable skills or savings when you don't win the lottery of making it pro.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,974
It’s a dangerous form of labor with unreliable security. Like doing heavy construction work for 2-4 years before entering a lottery to keep your job, and if you get injured they just let you go.They should absolutely be paid and taken care of even if they don’t go pro, and I don’t even like sports. It’s about treating people who are barely adults fairly and compassionately.
 

Chaos Legion

Member
Oct 30, 2017
3,405
It is my understanding that collegiate athletics generates profit and they should be paid out of that profit. Is there something I'm missing here?
Should athletes be paid out from the athletic department on a level scale or based on the profit generated from each individual sport?

Men's football players / basketball players would make far more than Women's Lacrosse or Men's Wrestling. Now if there is a need to make up for funding that athletics typically provide, unprofitable sports may get cut, is the argument.
 

samoyed

Member
Oct 26, 2017
9,974
Should athletes be paid out from the athletic department on a level scale or based on the profit generated from each individual sport?
Profit generated per sport imo.

Men's football players / basketball players would make far more than Women's Lacrosse or Men's Wrestling. Now if there is a need to make up for funding that athletics typically provide, unprofitable sports may get cut, is the argument.
They can appeal to the generosity of their athletes like how they panhandle their alumni for donations.

I’d also support something more radical like an athletes union where the athletes themselves choose how to divide profit among the sports, but I doubt the collegiate sport scene is ready for seizing the means of production.
 
OP
OP
Neece

Neece

Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,405
And then you get injured, lose your scholarship, and the school throws you aside like so much refuse. You of course can't hold a real job for spending money or pursue other cultured interests during the school year because of the time and travel commitment. Or more commonly, you squeeze through with a C- average taking joke level classes and have no real marketable skills or savings when you don't win the lottery of making it pro.
Do schools still strip injured athletes of their scholarships? I follow my college football team and every year there are a few that get disqualified by team doctors and prematurely end their career but they always retain their scholarship as a Medically DQed athlete that stays on scholly but doesn’t count against the scholarship limit. Hell they’ve been giving full scholarships to high school recruits that committed but got hurt and medically DQed before they got to campus.

But I’m not sure how widespread or common this is. I’d assume most of the FBS schools do it.
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,657
It’s a moot point. If an athlete signs a NIL promotional deal he or she is not eligible to play by NCAA rules which tanks their NIL value.
 

Malleymal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,783
So much backward shit in the ncaa...

Coach gets paid millions and can leave at any time and start at a new school for more money.

Player gets paid nothing, receives a “free education” and if they want to transfer, they have to sit out a year.

Get out of here.
 

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Nov 14, 2017
6,798
Do schools still strip injured athletes of their scholarships? I follow my college football team and every year there are a few that get disqualified by team doctors and prematurely end their career but they always retain their scholarship as a Medically DQed athlete that stays on scholly but doesn’t count against the scholarship limit. Hell they’ve been giving full scholarships to high school recruits that committed but got hurt and medically DQed before they got to campus.

But I’m not sure how widespread or common this is. I’d assume most of the FBS schools do it.

There is also no provision in the Division I Manual to prohibit a coach from revoking a scholarship the year after a recruit gets hurt. For those from poor families and without coverage through a parent, this means that a young man or young woman can be enlisted on the promise of an education, get injured on the field, and lose his or her only source of medical insurance precisely when he or she needs it most. "There is no doubt there are horror stories out there about schools terminating scholarships," says Warren Zola, assistant dean for graduate programs in the Carroll School of Management at Boston College and a sports business expert. "It comes down to the ethos of particular schools."

Under N.C.A.A. rules, players can still lose their scholarships after being hurt, often pay for their own insurance and are generally responsible for long-term health care for injuries sustained on the playing field. Huma's goal is to ensure that current and former athletes never pay out of pocket for sports injuries.
It’s a moot point. If an athlete signs a NIL promotional deal he or she is not eligible to play by NCAA rules which tanks their NIL value.
The NCAA will have to heavily reconsider this if prime athletes start flocking to California schools and they threaten to abandon the NCAA.
 

Kill3r7

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,657
If top high school athletes go to CA college and sign a NIL promotional agreement then they are ineligible to play under NCAA competition. So while that diluted talent, the the NCAA doesn’t care. That said, they probably dread losing the CA TV market which might be a massive blow financially. So presumably they will challenge the constitutionality of this law.
 

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Nov 14, 2017
6,798
If top high school athletes go to CA college and sign a NIL promotional agreement then they are ineligible to play under NCAA competition. So while that diluted talent, the the NCAA doesn’t care. That said, they probably dread losing the CA TV market which might be a massive blow financially. So presumably they will challenge the constitutionality of this law.
The NCAA bringing this to court would be laughable considering the athletes have never entered a collective bargaining agreement with the NCAA, and as they are ostensibly bound by state and federal laws, not the other way around.

If the NCAA wouldn't nuke the UNC, USC, or Penn State individual sports programs after egregious violations, they aren't going to suddenly tell all of Stanford, Berkeley, and UCLA to kick rocks.