O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

[dougdirt]

A football career is fleeting. An education benefits you for a lifetime. It's interesting how the media focuses on the superstar athletes, making it seem like they've been done wrong because they weren't paid in college. But no one seems to talk about the much greater number of players who weren't as fortunate to have the talent to go pro after college. I'd be interested in seeing a poll on how many of them would prefer being paid over a free education. I suspect a lot of them have benefited much more from having a college education free from debt than any temporary cash benefit they would have gotten.

I'm at the point where I'd be fine if the current system were replaced by a semi-pro system. Let players choose free education, room, and board, or let them choose money. But if you choose the money, don't cry about it later when the money runs out and you're left fighting to find a job with no college degree. Me, I would choose a debt free college education, but everyone makes their own choices in life.

I would choose getting that education and still making $75,000 a year on top of it like I would deserve if I were making a school tens of millions of dollars by playing football for them.

Again, the University of Texas pays all of their players their scholarships, housing, everything. They then pay the coaches, the other people and everything involved there. Then they rake in another $60,000,000 of pure profit. The money is there.

[improbus]

A football career is fleeting. An education benefits you for a lifetime. It's interesting how the media focuses on the superstar athletes, making it seem like they've been done wrong because they weren't paid in college. But no one seems to talk about the much greater number of players who weren't as fortunate to have the talent to go pro after college. I'd be interested in seeing a poll on how many of them would prefer being paid over a free education. I suspect a lot of them have benefited much more from having a college education free from debt than any temporary cash benefit they would have gotten.

I'm at the point where I'd be fine if the current system were replaced by a semi-pro system. Let players choose free education, room, and board, or let them choose money. But if you choose the money, don't cry about it later when the money runs out and you're left fighting to find a job with no college degree. Me, I would choose a debt free college education, but everyone makes their own choices in life.

I mostly agree with this. I'm not entirely against giving the kids a education as compensation. It is valuable to the kid in a way that football/basketball may never be for a huge chunk of student athletes. My problems with the system are the following.

1) The NCAA denies kids the right to work. This doesn't happen anywhere else in college. A Chemistry scholarship does not come with a "you can't have a job to supplement your income" clause.

2) The NCAA denies kids the rights to profit on their own name. The NCAA has proven themselves completely greedy and hypocritical on this front. Follow Jay Bilas on twitter for some examples of this. The only person who can't profit off Johnny Manziel's name is Johnny Manziel.

That's it. What's amazing is that neither of those things involve the NCAA giving away a single dollar. They don't have to share. Just don't deny the kids some basic rights that the rest of us enjoy.

[jojo]

Aren't there straw men all over the place in this discussion?

Nobody says they should get paid instead of an education - most people would want both.

Most people just want these kids to have a more reasonable living stipend and the ability to make money on their name - be it by selling autographs or memorabilia they own or whatever. It's ridiculous the colleges make money selling their jerseys and the players don't benefit.

Every single NFL player would be in the NFL in a world without the NCAA because they would have all played in whatever system existed instead.

In this world, of course the players have to play in the NCAA, because that's the system. There is nowhere else to play football at the age of 18-21. People point at the CFL and Arena Leagues as if they are options - these are leagues that don't play by the same rules or even have the same size field as the NFL.

So in other words, no Foster wouldn't have been able to develop into an nfl talent without his time in college football which speaks to the bigger point- he's full of hoopy that he was not financially benefiting substantially by his collegiate experience. He obtained an education, at least to the extent that HE chose to take full advantage of the opportunity while getting access to really the premier opportunity for career development/advancement for one aspiring to play in the nfl, i.e. the coaching/facilities/playing experience afforded by big time college football.

The "I need an agent funneling me wads of spending cash" argument really rings VERY hollow even before brushing off mythical player development systems that are fantasized to have absolutely allowed him to end up in the same place.

[bucksfan2]

Even the scrubs at Ohio State would be able to make pocket money selling autographs. Local businesses would bring them in in a heartbeat.

I disagree. There are only so many player on a college football team that are marketable. You are closer to OSU now that I am but I would imagine there are a handful of players who would be a draw, other than that unless your are a hardcore fan or a young kid you could really care less. At OSU right now you probably have Braxton, Philly Brown, Guiton (now), Shazier, and Roby as guys that most people would recognize and "pay" to get their autograph. There are a bunch of other guys who may have some allure but the draw would be minimal.

I don't think a business in Columbus would be successful having a "Come meet Devin Smith and Marcus Hall day."

[bucksfan2]

2) The NCAA denies kids the rights to profit on their own name. The NCAA has proven themselves completely greedy and hypocritical on this front. Follow Jay Bilas on twitter for some examples of this. The only person who can't profit off Johnny Manziel's name is Johnny Manziel.

Do you think Jay Bilas would have been given the opportunity to have his current job had he not played basketball at Duke? How many avenues opened up because he was a Duke basketball player.

Jay probably would have had a successful career without college basketball. I think he has his law degree and is a pretty sharp guy. But I don't think he is anywhere near as successful as he is now without the help of college basketball. Those evil institutions that he constantly rips.

[Chip R]

I don't know about paying players or not playing players but even though I enjoy watching college football, I am increasingly uncomfortable with college football and basketball being a de facto minor league for the NFL and the NBA. I am uncomfortable seeing schools raise tuition and fees so they can pay a coach more than another school will. I am uncomfortable to see tax dollars supporting an institution that rakes in tens of millions of dollars from television every year. My understanding is that the purpose of college is not to allow students into the college who can barely read or write and then keep them eligible until it's time for them to leave.

Hypothetical question: If major college football were to eliminate scholarships across the board for all teams and field teams of just ordinary students from the school, would you still support them? Everyone is in the same boat from Alabama to tOSU to Michigan to USC to Oklahoma to Texas. All those schools have to field a team from their regular student body. No recruiting, no special admits, no shenanigans. Would you still religiously follow your alma mater or your favorite school?

[dougdirt]

I don't know about paying players or not playing players but even though I enjoy watching college football, I am increasingly uncomfortable with college football and basketball being a de facto minor league for the NFL and the NBA. I am uncomfortable seeing schools raise tuition and fees so they can pay a coach more than another school will. I am uncomfortable to see tax dollars supporting an institution that rakes in tens of millions of dollars from television every year. My understanding is that the purpose of college is not to allow students into the college who can barely read or write and then keep them eligible until it's time for them to leave.

Hypothetical question: If major college football were to eliminate scholarships across the board for all teams and field teams of just ordinary students from the school, would you still support them? Everyone is in the same boat from Alabama to tOSU to Michigan to USC to Oklahoma to Texas. All those schools have to field a team from their regular student body. No recruiting, no special admits, no shenanigans. Would you still religiously follow your alma mater or your favorite school?

I wouldn't watch. I am a UC fan. But I have never watched a womans game. I have never watched any sport they have that isn't basketball, football or baseball because it simply isn't exciting to watch. If you just use regular students, the games won't be nearly as exciting because the talent pool won't be there. It would be like watching high school football. Slow and boring.

[dougdirt]

I disagree. There are only so many player on a college football team that are marketable. You are closer to OSU now that I am but I would imagine there are a handful of players who would be a draw, other than that unless your are a hardcore fan or a young kid you could really care less. At OSU right now you probably have Braxton, Philly Brown, Guiton (now), Shazier, and Roby as guys that most people would recognize and "pay" to get their autograph. There are a bunch of other guys who may have some allure but the draw would be minimal.

I don't think a business in Columbus would be successful having a "Come meet Devin Smith and Marcus Hall day."

Corky Miller has done local signings here in Cincinnati. Corky freaking Miller. People would show up to see most of the players.

[CoachBombay]

I don't know about paying players or not playing players but even though I enjoy watching college football, I am increasingly uncomfortable with college football and basketball being a de facto minor league for the NFL and the NBA. I am uncomfortable seeing schools raise tuition and fees so they can pay a coach more than another school will. I am uncomfortable to see tax dollars supporting an institution that rakes in tens of millions of dollars from television every year. My understanding is that the purpose of college is not to allow students into the college who can barely read or write and then keep them eligible until it's time for them to leave.

Hypothetical question: If major college football were to eliminate scholarships across the board for all teams and field teams of just ordinary students from the school, would you still support them? Everyone is in the same boat from Alabama to tOSU to Michigan to USC to Oklahoma to Texas. All those schools have to field a team from their regular student body. No recruiting, no special admits, no shenanigans. Would you still religiously follow your alma mater or your favorite school?

A little off topic I know....But im uncomfortable paying so much money to get my education, and while still being in debt after I graduate they still have the audacity to ask me for donations....really?

[IslandRed]

Again, the University of Texas pays all of their players their scholarships, housing, everything. They then pay the coaches, the other people and everything involved there. Then they rake in another $60,000,000 of pure profit. The money is there.

That's Texas. Can Texas Tech pay all of its scholarship athletes $75,000 a year on top of what they're already spending on scholarships?

That's the problem with most solutions I see proposed -- they don't account for the continued existence of Title IX, or that every school trying to play major-college football isn't swimming in cash like Texas.

[Brutus]

Do you think Jay Bilas would have been given the opportunity to have his current job had he not played basketball at Duke? How many avenues opened up because he was a Duke basketball player.

Jay probably would have had a successful career without college basketball. I think he has his law degree and is a pretty sharp guy. But I don't think he is anywhere near as successful as he is now without the help of college basketball. Those evil institutions that he constantly rips.

Not only does he have a law degree, he actually is a practicing attorney in Charlotte.

[dougdirt]

That's Texas. Can Texas Tech pay all of its scholarship athletes $75,000 a year on top of what they're already spending on scholarships?

That's the problem with most solutions I see proposed -- they don't account for the continued existence of Title IX, or that every school trying to play major-college football isn't swimming in cash like Texas.

Title IX is the reason it won't happen. Title IX is a joke though. Schools are businesses. In other businesses, portions of their business that lose money hand over foot (like nearly every womans sport at every school in the country along with most mens sports at most schools) would be eliminated. But there is a law in this case to make it "fair".

Texas Tech can't pay that. So what? The guys playing football at Northwestern are getting a much larger "payment" than the guys playing at Western Kentucky.

Set it up so the players get paid X% of whatever the football program profits. It would look just like it does now. The best players would go to the biggest schools.

[Boston Red]

Title IX is the reason it won't happen. Title IX is a joke though. Schools are businesses. In other businesses, portions of their business that lose money hand over foot (like nearly every womans sport at every school in the country along with most mens sports at most schools) would be eliminated. But there is a law in this case to make it "fair".

Texas Tech can't pay that. So what? The guys playing football at Northwestern are getting a much larger "payment" than the guys playing at Western Kentucky.

Set it up so the players get paid X% of whatever the football program profits. It would look just like it does now. The best players would go to the biggest schools.

It wouldn't look just like it does now. Texas Tech will beat the living hell out of Texas on the field this year. Under your proposed system, that would be impossible.

[IslandRed]

Schools are businesses. In other businesses, portions of their business that lose money hand over foot (like nearly every womans sport at every school in the country along with most mens sports at most schools) would be eliminated.

And yet, nearly every college, university and high school in America has traditionally fielded athletic teams, despite the fact that only a handful of teams at a handful of schools can truly justify themselves on a balance sheet when the full cost is computed. By that logic, college sports shouldn't have ever existed.

Truth is, schools aren't really like private businesses. At least, public universities aren't. Obviously, they have to pay their bills, so business concerns come with that. But making money isn't the reason for their existence. If we tried to list everything a university does that doesn't strictly pay for itself we'd be here all day.

[Sea Ray]

Even the scrubs at Ohio State would be able to make pocket money selling autographs. Local businesses would bring them in in a heartbeat.

Sure but how 'bout the scrubs at Youngstown state? The players at OSU will make a lot more than the Youngstown St kids. That's the rub...