BCS/NCAA and antitrust lawsuits

So of course there are the anti-BCS cases but I think the player compensation cases are the ones that will cause the biggest changes.



http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6487782" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



What do you think the over/under on the number of BYU athletes (past and present) who join the class will be?

jvquarterback wrote:
So of course there are the anti-BCS cases but I think the player compensation cases are the ones that will cause the biggest changes.



http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6487782" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



What do you think the over/under on the number of BYU athletes (past and present) who join the class will be?

I hope alot of them do. If the NCAA/Colleges want to use athletes' images to sell video games, fine, give them a cut.

This will be interesting to watch. I agree that college sports should remain amateur, however, it is not right that the NCAA is making money off these kids. I would like to see a ruling in favor of the players with the setting up of a trust of some sort that collects the profits made from a player's image. Use this trust to reimburse the school for the expense of the scholarships and for their programs, then the remainder given back to the athletes in some form after they graduate and only once they receive their degree. The NCAA making money off of these kids is like the old mafia bosses controlling the neighborhoods. I hate seeing the NCAA gain more and more power at the expense of the athletes.

Actually, I am pleasantly surprised by the approach the Justice Department took in addressing this issue. They did not address the BCS, they went right to the NCAA to ask them why they abdicated their role in administering a championship. Obviously, the bowl system has been around forever, but it is still a great question, asked to the correct group. Why do they allow the BCS to basically run their championship? Can't wait to hear their answer.

I disagree. To say the NCAA has some inherent role in administering a championship is to admit the NCAA is a monopoly/cartel. I'm not saying the BCS isn't a cartel. But the reason the bowl system exists is because they beat the NCAA to the punch.



No the answer is more competition. If the independence thing works out and USC and a few more follow BYU's lead you'll see a tournament in time. And more competition means the players and teams make more money rather than letting the NCAA cartel take a cut.

Paying player would likely have unintended consequences. most athletic budgets struggle to keep themselves out of the red as it is. I think a move like that would hurt the quality of most programs accept the elite ones like texas, notre dame, etc that would be able to afford it. it may even put an end to many.



I think getting a free education, room board, food, and medical, as well as a platform to increase their marketability is enough compensation. They are free to leave after a year if they want to go to the nfl and get paid. if they are not good enough then they should be happy with their free education and the opportunity to play a sport at the college level.



Just my opinion.

jonnylingo wrote:
Paying player would likely have unintended consequences. most athletic budgets struggle to keep themselves out of the red as it is. I think a move like that would hurt the quality of most programs accept the elite ones like texas, notre dame, etc that would be able to afford it. it may even put an end to many.



I think getting a free education, room board, food, and medical, as well as a platform to increase their marketability is enough compensation. They are free to leave after a year if they want to go to the nfl and get paid. if they are not good enough then they should be happy with their free education and the opportunity to play a sport at the college level.



Just my opinion.

I agree that paying players may lead to unintended consequences. For example, some have floated the idea that you don't have to pay players, but just allow them to get money from whatever endorsement deals they can do as college players. The problem with that is that then NIKE, Karl Malone Toyota or whoever would have much more influence over where a kid might go to school in order to cash in on an endorsement deal. It would be the SMU scandal all over again because Boosters who own companies could just give players a large wad of cash for an "endorsement."



So long as the players are getting a FULL ride--and that means tuition, books, room and board, and a small amount of spending money ($500/mo.) for all 12 months in a year--then I think most college athletes are being more than compensated for their playing career. The value of that degree in their future earnings (assuming they don't play professional sports) will probably be in the $1.5-$4.5 Million range ($50k-$150K times 30 years), or more. Ask any college student footing the bill themselves and they would jump at the chance to get the University to pay their bills.



That being said, the pot can be sweetend a little for players because I think there are still some gaps where they do not get everything I talked about that should be in a full ride. I remember reading somewhere that things get tight for them, especially during the summer, because they may not get any assistance then (which leads to jobs where they don't have to show up, etc. from boosters). I could be wrong about that though.



I kind of like the trust fund idea. If the NCAA is making money off of the players, why not kick a percentage of that back to the players when they graduate. I know I could have used a nice $10K - $50K check after graduation to put a downpayment on a house, buy furniture or whatever. It would also encourage kids to not give up on finishing their education that last semester before a draft. There are probably downsides to the idea that I am not thinking about.

I see a college players association in the near future. Maybe even a strike and lockout. Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.

paying players will be teh end of college athletics. Period. BYU would end their AD before they paid a player. Simple as that.



jvquarterback seems to think every sport actually turns a profit when most AD's run in the red and have to dip into the general fund to get by. And by most, I mean every non-BCS school, with few exceptions, and even some BCS schools. The math does not work. Never will.

But the big point we are skirting around is that the NCAA among a whole bunch of others are making huge profits off these kids. Why should they be allowed to profit from the athletes and their image?



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Lawboy wrote:
paying players will be teh end of college athletics. Period. BYU would end their AD before they paid a player. Simple as that.



jvquarterback seems to think every sport actually turns a profit when most AD's run in the red and have to dip into the general fund to get by. And by most, I mean every non-BCS school, with few exceptions, and even some BCS schools. The math does not work. Never will.

I don't know why you believe BYU would abandon college athletics if payers are allowed to be reimbursed for their services. What do you base this idea upon? Coaches can be paid, why would BYU say if players can be paid we'll simply abandon all athletics programs?



BYU men's soccer is a franchise (purchased by BYU in 2003) in the Premier Development League. And soccer players can be paid (though most aren't in the PDL). So to say BYU would abandon its athletics program if players can be paid does not fit in with what BYU has committed to in men's soccer.



I think the players will win the reimbursement lawsuits and BYU, with experience with men's soccer, will be positioned well to continue to compete in that environment.



http://www.byusoccer.com/pdl.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I base it upon the rule of economics. How many BYU athletes are there> If they all got paid the same, then how much is it? What will the AD budget allow? And wouldn't hat convert them all to professionals, basically barring them from certain competitions? It would for many sports.



IF you want to enhance what a scholarship involves, fine. Give a larger stipend for living expenses per semester. I am fine with that. Above that--no. They are college students just like every other, are getting a paid for education, and do not need be treated differently because they play a sport.

Professionalism is coming. The players will win the lawsuits. This is America.



BYU has already shown its willingness to field a team in men's soccer that allows for player reimbursement. Not all players are reimbursed the same amount and many players actually pay a lot of money to participate. If the players win the reimbursement lawsuits, the same will happen in each sport BYU fields. Which is as it should be.

Lawboy is exactly right on this. The day college athletes are paid above and beyond scholarships is the day that BYU closes its athletics dept. It's also the day that America dies and becomes hopelessly lost. It is also the day I officially stop being a sports fan.

Do you not support the BYU men's soccer team? Better drop the BYU blue goggled homer from your status.

jvquarterback wrote:
Do you not support the BYU men's soccer team? Better drop the BYU blue goggled homer from your status.

How many of them are getting paid? And whats their salaries?

Don't know. Probably just a few if any. But the rules allow for payment. And that is what lawboy claims will be the end of BYU athletics, though it clearly isn't.



The only sports I could realistically see paying most players would be football and basketball, though one or two players on a great volleyball, soccer, or swim team might be able to negotiate a salary. And track, CC, tennis and golf athletes could win a competition and make some money. People who don't make money and want to participate will have to pay their own way, and that is a good thing.



The end of the world scenario presented by lawboy is easily disproved by looking at the BYU men's soccer situation.

I don't see anything in your comments that disproves Lawboy's assertions. The fact that BYU soccer plays in a league in which there could be professional players doesn't change anything. When you have solid #s regarding pay for play specifically at BYU then come back and reopen this topic, until then nothing has changed.

Lawboy asserts that payments to players would end BYU athletics. He bears the burden of proving this statement which I believe to be untrue. Perhaps he only means it as hyperbole and he thinks some sports would no longer be supported in that paradigm. But I would like to know the basis of his assertion when at least one of BYU's athletic programs is set up within a league that allows athletes to be paid. Has he spoken to the president of the university or the directors? I would assume they are the only ones who would be able to confirm lawboy's assertion.

Um...none men's soccer players are getting paid. If they were being compensated in representing the university, they would be subject to Title IX, which would defeat the purpose in maintaining them as a club team.



Yes, they do play against some professional teams, but the BYU players pay their own way through school and the team is funded by outside donations and sponsorships. But that money does not trickle down to the players--it just allows them to go to Europe each off-season and play against the reserve teams for clubs like FC Barcelona. According to the BYU Soccer recruiting website: "The B.Y.U. Soccer team does not award scholarships. Each player provides their own money for expenses with regard to academics and room and board. Players travel expenses and attire are paid for as members of the team. "