Jump to content

Supreme Court rules college athletes are entitled to compensation


Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, slufanskip said:

The overwhelmingly large number of D1 players couldn't make 30k playing elsewhere, so the idea that they're not getting what they are worth is ridiculous. Also the likeness is worth nothing for 95+% of them if wasn't for an NCAA school. As much as I love JGood and Has who is paying to use their likeness if not for the fact they play for an NCAA institution. Here's the answer. Absolutely no one. 

This is the heart of it for me. Speaking about basketball only, a 19 year old has many options regarding where to take his talents. He can go NBA, G-League, Europe, China, wherever and get paid whatever the market will bear. It seems reasonable to me that NCAA schools can set the pay equal to the value of a scholarship and say "If you don't like it, go somewhere else." Throw in NIL, and most 19 year olds will make more with a scholarship and NIL revenue than they would playing in any of those other leagues.

Football is a bit different as there is no palatable place for a 19 year old to go other than college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 197
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

14 hours ago, slufanskip said:

The overwhelmingly large number of D1 players couldn't make 30k playing elsewhere, so the idea that they're not getting what they are worth is ridiculous. Also the likeness is worth nothing for 95+% of them if wasn't for an NCAA school. As much as I love JGood and Has who is paying to use their likeness if not for the fact they play for an NCAA institution. Here's the answer. Absolutely no one. 

Not paid what they are worth?  The now more open marketplace will test your theory.  I tend to think you're right, for most players, but the Zion Williamsons of the world will (did) get paid more for a reason.  And Zion Williamsons lead to banners in the rafters.  The benchwarmers don't.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, someoneelse said:

Not paid what they are worth?  The now more open marketplace will test your theory.  I tend to think you're right, for most players, but the Zion Williamsons of the world will (did) get paid more for a reason.  And Zion Williamsons lead to banners in the rafters.  The benchwarmers don't.  

I agree with you on Zion Williamses, but that's the minority of players. Maybe College ball isn't the right place for them. If you took the top 20 players and they don't go to college but the NBA, G League, Europe, etc ... I don't think it changes the interest in D! basketball. I'm a SLU fan, I'm going to root for SLU. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

I agree with you on Zion Williamses, but that's the minority of players. Maybe College ball isn't the right place for them. If you took the top 20 players and they don't go to college but the NBA, G League, Europe, etc ... I don't think it changes the interest in D! basketball. I'm a SLU fan, I'm going to root for SLU. 

The college game would be better if the one and done's don't go to college. I am a strong advocate of the baseball rule. If you sign with a college you can't go to the NBA G League for 2 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, someoneelse said:

Not paid what they are worth?  The now more open marketplace will test your theory.  I tend to think you're right, for most players, but the Zion Williamsons of the world will (did) get paid more for a reason.  And Zion Williamsons lead to banners in the rafters.  The benchwarmers don't.  

Zion could have made more in China or Europe than he would have made on the open market with a college team.  With college teams right now too large of a percentage of the revenue generated and booster money is tied up in coaches salaries. Until a dramatic shift happens with coaches' salaries in college basketball, the money players think is there is not actually there.  It is already spent.

I thought for a long time that when this started happening, it would exert tremendous downward pressure on the pay of coaches.  The more I have thought about it, the less likely I think that will happen.  A coach is the only constant in a college program and that makes a good coach by far the most valuable thing in college basketball.   How much was even a guy like Zion Williamson worth to Duke?  They got to the Elite Eight with Zion and didn't win the ACC regular season title.  Duke can make and has made the Elite Eight with zero one and done players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going to save my comments to see what the NCAA comes up with re this ruling. That said, it goes beyond just BB and FB. The other non revenue sports have to be considered as well. That's where it will get interesting. I expect lawsuits will fill the air. The ball is now in the very incapable hands of the NCAA, and you know they are going to do what's best for their preservation. Therefore, the end result will likely be decided by the Major Conferences, and they're greedy ba^&#rds. 

The Majors, ie P5 or P7, won't be interested in any revenue sharing program with 280 mid major programs when it comes to hoops. I expect they'll break away from the NCAA, ala FB, and set up what is in effect a professional college league. Where that will leave our major revenue sports program is anyone's guess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kshoe said:

This is the heart of it for me. Speaking about basketball only, a 19 year old has many options regarding where to take his talents. He can go NBA, G-League, Europe, China, wherever and get paid whatever the market will bear. It seems reasonable to me that NCAA schools can set the pay equal to the value of a scholarship and say "If you don't like it, go somewhere else." Throw in NIL, and most 19 year olds will make more with a scholarship and NIL revenue than they would playing in any of those other leagues.

Football is a bit different as there is no palatable place for a 19 year old to go other than college.

Let’s say that the worst outcome happens, and schools in football have to cut full scholarships for football players on half of their team so that they can pay for the top 22- 30 players. Ok. That would be rough for the rest of the 58 person team. They might have to make it on academics. It would change the culture around the sport. Is that really bad for the country, or for the sport? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.csnbbs.com/thread-813807.html
 

These are the budgets for schools in basketball. There are statements about how the upcoming legal changes would be good or bad for SLU, but no clear explanation of what would happen. These budgets could be examined to determine the likely money that could be applied to players and estimate how this would change the recruiting landscape. Just note that the biggest budgets are only 3 times the size of SLU, which seems low. Certainly, the big schools bring in more than 3 times the amount of 4-5* players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atlantic 10:

Saint Louis University 6,414,061

Virginia Commonwealth University 5,676,415

University of Dayton 5,000,454

University of Richmond 4,849,596

University of Rhode Island 4,286,329

Duquesne University 4,229,922

Saint Joseph's University 4,208,092

Fordham University 4,126,729

University of Massachusetts-Amherst 4,064,482

George Mason University 3,342,681

La Salle University 2,946,555

St Bonaventure University 2,917,071

George Washington University 2,915,197

Davidson College 2,799,370

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Brighton said:

Atlantic 10:

Saint Louis University 6,414,061

Virginia Commonwealth University 5,676,415

University of Dayton 5,000,454

University of Richmond 4,849,596

University of Rhode Island 4,286,329

Duquesne University 4,229,922

Saint Joseph's University 4,208,092

Fordham University 4,126,729

University of Massachusetts-Amherst 4,064,482

George Mason University 3,342,681

La Salle University 2,946,555

St Bonaventure University 2,917,071

George Washington University 2,915,197

Davidson College 2,799,370

 

 

 


There have been posts in the past that these figures do not include “outside money” coming in.  Is that possible?  Could it be that SLU is not number 1 in spending?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's clearly a lot of revenue. My contention is that it isn't the players bringing it in, it's the school and the sport. Get rid of the top 30 players every year. Lets assume take another route. The NCAA men's basketball revenue remains the same. The #31 player now becomes the #1 player. The players will still be good and the competition will be the same. Someone will come in first, someone will come in last. How many here would not be fans if JGood never came, but we had other players achieving the same or like results? 

I'm fine with a stipend as I get it, they can't work. Sorry but Has couldn't have earned the value of his scholarship, food, lodging, etc ... on the open market peddling his basketball skills over the last 4 years. Not only did SLU give him more than he could have earned, they've trained him to potentially now earn more. 

This is just going to create a bigger divide between the haves and the have nots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Brighton said:

Locally:

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 7,341,910

Saint Louis University 6,414,061

University of Missouri-Columbia 5,963,284

I find that ranking surprising. I guess these numbers are from 2015-16 when Mizzou was probably paying Kim Anderson a pittance, and we were four years in to paying Crews. But I'd think the television and tournament money the SEC gets would put Mizzou in a different tax bracket. Even if we were bolstered by the 2012-14 tournament appearances, I'd think the comparable SEC cash flow (KU won it in 2012 and went to the final in 2014) would outstrip A10 teams. If it is true, good for us. And it's obviously subjective, but I think at a high level our coaching and facilities (without being able to piggyback on some football weight room/training stuff) are at least comparable if not better. And I guess when you look over the last four years (when the 3 coaches have overlapped) the results are pretty comparable: 

260275454_ScreenShot2021-06-23at9_30_24AM.png.a49ab740440141d42431afab8f6db387.png

1672007720_ScreenShot2021-06-23at9_30_58AM.png.6e3a3ff92bdbb3acf7738c881a6eaaa8.png

1372125383_ScreenShot2021-06-23at9_30_34AM.png.1435e4b023a1b58204f139c1f1d71854.png

I've always thought of us as doing more with less. Maybe I need to recalibrate that more to doing the same with the same. Would be interesting to see more data than one list on a MAC focused discussion thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, slufanskip said:

There's clearly a lot of revenue. My contention is that it isn't the players bringing it in, it's the school and the sport. Get rid of the top 30 players every year. Lets assume take another route. The NCAA men's basketball revenue remains the same. The #31 player now becomes the #1 player. The players will still be good and the competition will be the same. Someone will come in first, someone will come in last. How many here would not be fans if JGood never came, but we had other players achieving the same or like results? 

I'm fine with a stipend as I get it, they can't work. Sorry but Has couldn't have earned the value of his scholarship, food, lodging, etc ... on the open market peddling his basketball skills over the last 4 years. Not only did SLU give him more than he could have earned, they've trained him to potentially now earn more. 

This is just going to create a bigger divide between the haves and the have nots. 

I have been advocating for a decent stipend for years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, slufanskip said:

Sorry but Has couldn't have earned the value of his scholarship, food, lodging, etc ... on the open market peddling his basketball skills over the last 4 years. Not only did SLU give him more than he could have earned, they've trained him to potentially now earn more. 

When there's basically one buyer of what you're selling, and they're allowed to set their price, it's hard to earn any more than what they're willing to pay. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Compton said:

When there's basically one buyer of what you're selling, and they're allowed to set their price, it's hard to earn any more than what they're willing to pay. 

But there isn't just one buyer and if you are telling me the only option JGood had for his services as a basketball player was in college (though that's incorrect) I'd ask why if those services are so valuable aren't there any other options with more lucrative pay. 

Why? because no one wants to pay to see college players play unless they are affiliated with a school. It's the school people are paying for not the player. 

If we started a new league tomorrow and got college level players not good enough for the NBA could we make enough money to show a small profit and pay them 50K+ per year? The answer is no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i also wonder if this will lead to lawsuits where athletes from the non revenue sports will be wanting to be paid the same as the star basketball and football players.  

also, are athletes going to want health insurance and retirement benefits like the non student athlete employees at the college concerned?  

i think this is really opening a can of worms.   just dont see it ending well with so many questions it will create from so many angles.  glad i am not any sort of college administrator

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

But there isn't just one buyer. 

The NBA has about 25 20-year olds and 5 19-year olds. The D-League has about 10 20-year olds and 5 19-year olds. Aside from those 45 dudes (call it 1% of the 4,641 D1 basketball scholarships granted each year), what open market or buyer for high school graduate/college aged basketball talent are you referring to? Aside from LaMelo Ball, are the European leagues signing American kids out of high school? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Compton said:

The NBA has about 25 20-year olds and 5 19-year olds. The D-League has about 10 20-year olds and 5 19-year olds. Aside from those 45 dudes (call it 1% of the 4,641 D1 basketball scholarships granted each year), what open market or buyer for high school graduate/college aged basketball talent are you referring to? Aside from LaMelo Ball, are the European leagues signing American kids out of high school? 

 

Ahhh my point. There isn't really a market for their skills at this level because there is no demand. We're insisting colleges pay for a service no one really wants. Why aren't the European leagues signing them? Because they aren't good enough. One more time. Except for the fact they play for a certain college, no one is willing to pay to see them play. They are certainly free to see if they could get a better deal than a D1 scholarship plus free room and board if they'd like. You're lamenting that there's no open market for a product no one wants. 

Heck, Start a minor league basket league. See if it sells enough that you could pay players 50k ish a year. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Ahhh my point. There isn't really a market for their skills at this level because there is no demand. We're insisting colleges pay for a service no one really wants. Why aren't the European leagues signing them? Because they aren't good enough. One more time. Except for the fact they play for a certain college, no one is willing to pay to see them play. They are certainly free to see if they could get a better deal than a D1 scholarship plus free room and board if they'd like. You're lamenting that there's no open market for a product no one wants. 

Heck, Start a minor league basket league. See if it sells enough that you could pay players 50k ish a year. 

Each year CBS pays $1.1 billion to broadcast March Madness. Winning in that tournament can mean millions in additional revenue for a given conference or school. Schools spend millions on coaches and facilities, knowing that a winning program will increase alumni engagement and giving. Coaches spend years recruiting talent, flying around the country to watch them play and show their interest. So there's obviously huge demand for their skills. 

"There isn't really a market for their skills because there is no demand," is just ignoring the obvious. It's like saying, "there's no demand for baseball talent outside of the MLB and MiLB. If the MLB/MiLB players went to the 'open market' there'd be no demand for their skills." They are the market. Hence the requirement of collective bargaining. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Compton said:

Each year CBS pays $1.1 billion to broadcast March Madness. Winning in that tournament can mean millions in additional revenue for a given conference or school. Schools spend millions on coaches and facilities, knowing that a winning program will increase alumni engagement and giving. Coaches spend years recruiting talent, flying around the country to watch them play and show their interest. So there's obviously huge demand for their skills. 

"There isn't really a market for their skills because there is no demand," is just ignoring the obvious. It's like saying, "there's no demand for baseball talent outside of the MLB and MiLB. If the MLB/MiLB players went to the 'open market' there'd be no demand for their skills." They are the market. Hence the requirement of collective bargaining. 

The demand is there in NCAA due to the school not the individual players. Remove D1 basketball and see what demand there is. 

Your comparison with baseball missing the point. I'm not saying their isn't a demand for basketball. I'm saying there isn't a demand for basketball below the NBA and their minor league. 

And minor league baseball in general makes very little money and the average player makes peanuts. Check and see what a player in the Independent league makes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...