Not really. A booster will pay extra, just like boosters who give athletes summer jobs with little work and high pay that the so-called market would not provide. You will still have the problem of boosters attempting to buy players for the school.
I’ll just leave everyone this link…it’s from several years ago but I always try to send it to out to people who don’t believe anything is happening. I posted it on this thread about a year ago as well.
2 Likes
Why use the future tense here.
You are describing a current reality.
And there is something wrong with anybody who would have a problem with that.
So what? It would be more fair for players and it would even the playing field for schools that don’t cheat like Michigan. Again I don’t understand what is fundamentally wrong with players getting paid for their likeness.
2 Likes
Nothing fundamentally wrong with it. But there are a lot of other complicating factors in initiating a system for it. One that hasn’t been broached in this thread is Title IX. Schools/athletic programs have to dedicate equal resources to Women’s programs. Setting aside an extra $5-6m for (on the low side) for paying Men’s Football, Men’s Basketball, Men’s Baseball, Men’s Ice Hockey would mean schools would have to set aside another equal amount for Women’s programs. The Michigans, Ohio Sts, Notre Dames, Penn Sts, Alabamas, Floridas, Texases of the college landscape could handle that easily, but many PowerConference Athletic Departments wouldn’t be able to handle that extra annual financial burden … and I don’t know that any non-PowerConference (or equivalent) Athletic Dept is even breaking even financially, so added millions in annual costs would put those hundreds of schools further in debt (or dropping major athletics).
Many who post only see that a product should be compensated but don’t have any idea how to get there. I am not sure If college players should be paid or not but if they must be it will take several years to figure it out so that it’s done fairly.
1 Like
I think that most people agree that allowing athletes to profit off of their likeness would fix most of these issues. Schools wouldn’t be responsible for compensating them directly.
Zion Williamson could sign a deal with Nike and the starting point guard at Wichita State could sign a deal with a local car dealership in Wichita State, for example.
3 Likes
Exactly. Not only would this be more fair for the athletes, but it would bring a lot of these payments, (which are happening anyways, but in secret and often illegal ways) into the out and open. That would create a much more even playing ground for schools like Michigan.
2 Likes
It would benefit the schools with the most resources and boosters. Which is happening anyways, it’d just be move above the table.
1 Like
While I agree with you 100% I feel like the big issue with profiting off their likeness is that local boosters will drive up the value. You’ll have guys getting huge gigs to rep at the local car dealership or local landscaping chains employee picnic. Not a no pay job type deal but who is to stop someone from giving the star QB $100k to make an appearance? Just a different and legal way for those boosters to give these kids the bag.
2 Likes
What’s wrong with that?
2 Likes
And schools with more resources and boosters also have better facilities, better travel, whatever else. They are always going to take advantage.
3 Likes
Yep and it bodes well for a school like ours with a massive alumni network both within and outside the state.
2 Likes
It won’t really change anything then. Will it?
1 Like
It will allow what is currently a black market that is outlawed by the NCAA under the guise of amateurism to be a legal above-board market.
2 Likes
I’m sure I’m just being an old fogey but if the bagmen have truly won, the one-and-done rule can’t end soon enough.
2 Likes
Not sure I follow? It isn’t really about bag men or this or that.
It is about the fact that this is an industry basically designed around making billions of dollars off of athletes who can’t make any money. They clearly have value (everyone else involved is making money, some get money against NCAA rules, etc.) and should be allowed to be compensated for that value.
The best option in my opinion is to be able to profit off of their likeness. That prevents any sort of Title IX issues and doesn’t mean that the NCAA or member institutions have to pay athletes directly. It would just allow a Heisman candidate to do a national ad campaign, Western Michigan’s PG to do an appearance at a local event or an elite swimmer to have a Nike sponsorship.
7 Likes
This all seems fine and fair except to Brad Davison, who has no likeness with which to generate profits. Would there be an exception so he could profit from his dislikeness?
11 Likes
I am truly amused that people can spin “athletes being compensated for the millions they produce” as “the bag men winning”.
I mean is your boss a “bag man”? He pays you for your work.