The stench you smell is the transfer portal - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The stench you smell is the transfer portal (/thread-22809.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The stench you smell is the transfer portal (/thread-22809.html)
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - OutsiderFan - 01-04-2022
(01-03-2022, 05:34 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: It seems silly (i.e., self-serving hypocrisy) to say the schools cannot pay players, but it's perfectly fine for them to arrange a million dollar endorsement at a local used car lot. They are all hand-picked ringers these days, so unless you change the recruiting system, you might as well pay them. How about a new rule: no NIL, no pay, and schools can only recruit within 500 miles of their campus.
This is why the NCAA has no chance of avoiding college athletes being classified as employees when the right challenges come along. Coaches and schools are arranging other people to pay their employees so they can get away with saying they aren't paid employees. I mean has there ever been a bigger anti-trust violation ever?
The only way the NCAA can save itself from this unregulated war of stupidity that is now going on, is to do what it never has done or demonstrated it is capable of doing. That is to be proactive and get ahead of an issue. Allow athletes to be paid by schools, with caps on spending. This may require schools to re-classify into more divisions with fewer teams, but it must be done.
You can say paying the labor requires athletes to be in a union and collectively bargain, but I don't think it really does. If for example, all scholarship college football players were allowed to be paid say $25k per year, it's highly doubtful they would have pushed for NIL rights. And if you wanted to maintain the claim to amateurism, you could've held the money in escrow accounts until players graduated or increased stipends a bit and put the rest in escrow. The NCAA never would have come up with the transfer portal as it squirmed to relieve the pressure it felt to liberalize its rules in the face of athletes demanding more, and could have probably gotten away with prohibiting NIL money because nobody would have challenged it if they were paid. Imagine the incentive the NCAA would have had to increase athlete grad rates if it was smarter.
Instead, the NCAA was forced to allowed NIL money, and that is never going away. It has the transfer portal and that is never going away. Now, all it needs is one case by a player who "had to take an NIL deal the school arranged for me because the school wouldn't pay me directly, and fulfilling the NIL deal obligations compromised the time I had to spend on improving my academic performance." When that happens, the NCAA will lose that case too, and be told schools have to pay the athletes and stop with arranging others to do it for them. Then the NCAA will ask how they are suppose to do that, and the courts will say that is your problem, figure it out. The NLRB has already said it will now classify college athletes as employees. https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/nlrb-general-counsel-jennifer-abruzzo-issues-memo-on-employee-status-of
All I know is history tells us that when there is no regulation and egos are driving decisions, financial ruin for many will soon follow. This is what happens in the sports business. It's why every major pro league has a salary cap and/or spending penalties. College sports will face similar dynamics on its current path, so the wisest approach is to be proactive. Schools will preserve more for themselves if proactive and volunteer to give up something than if they are forced to do it against their will.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - Phogge - 01-04-2022
Or the school can say that it is not giving in and is tired of being a minor league for the NFL and is tired of seeing its students suffer from long term mental impairment. Take the alumni hit and the donation hit and move on doing what its primary mission is.
RE: lex24 - 81alum - 01-04-2022
(01-03-2022, 10:23 PM)lex24 Wrote: Mixed feelings. Not crazy about college free agency. But I also think kids should be able to go where they want.Stanford will inevitably lose in a world in which all commitment on the part of student athletes is obliterated. Stanford will never be able to compete in the free agent game, because its academic standards sharply restrict "freedom of movement" between universities. Complete free agency will ultimately make it impossible for Stanford to be competitive in revenue sports. Let's hope it doesn't get that far.
Then there is the other matter. Personally, I would not enjoy backing a team composed of carpetbaggers who did not share the Stanford experience with me and who come and go too quickly for me to become attached to them. It is for this reason that I completely lost interest in professional sports. Now I see college sports importing the same interest-killing innovation.
Fortunately, Stanford is good at a lot of non revenue sports, so there will still be teams for me to root for, since Stanford will retain its advantages in sports that were never about a payday. But I fear deeply for football and MBB.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - Phogge - 01-04-2022
We gave up football at State way back when. It was a long time from the glory days of the Socher Brothers at QB for eight years and Bob Toledo. A bunch of conference titles under Joe Verducci and Vic Rowen. Foggy Friday nights at Cox Stadium and then chili dogs at Beeps or Tic Toc. Still it pissed off me and my old teammates. But you get over it.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - needle - 01-04-2022
I have not seen any evidence that college presidents are willing to give up any TV dollars.
Until then, I will continue to believe that only a scandal (when it comes, not if) likely related to NIL will force some colleges to actually work together to create a new model for CFB.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - BostonCard - 01-04-2022
(01-03-2022, 05:34 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: It seems silly (i.e., self-serving hypocrisy) to say the schools cannot pay players, but it's perfectly fine for them to arrange a million dollar endorsement at a local used car lot. They are all hand-picked ringers these days, so unless you change the recruiting system, you might as well pay them. How about a new rule: no NIL, no pay, and schools can only recruit within 500 miles of their campus.
The NCAA can argue that it had restricted NILs for precisely that reason, but that its hand was forced by the courts. Now, the courts may also find that athletes are employees and force the schools to pay them, and Kavenaugh, at the least, seemed to suggest as much, but it is also possible that five Supreme Court justices will not find athletes to be employees, and that the status quo will be allowed to continue.
BC
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - Goose - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 11:29 AM)BostonCard Wrote:Whatever the court eventually decides, the only way the NCAA or a similar organization can get any control over the situation is (IMHO) new legislation. The whole structure has been basically extra-legal for years, relying on nobody complaining. That cat is out of the bag, so "fixing" things will need a legal foundation. Unfortunately the NCAA is undoubtedly incapable of delivering a plan. Untils somebody does, chaos will reign.(01-03-2022, 05:34 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: It seems silly (i.e., self-serving hypocrisy) to say the schools cannot pay players, but it's perfectly fine for them to arrange a million dollar endorsement at a local used car lot. They are all hand-picked ringers these days, so unless you change the recruiting system, you might as well pay them. How about a new rule: no NIL, no pay, and schools can only recruit within 500 miles of their campus.
The NCAA can argue that it had restricted NILs for precisely that reason, but that its hand was forced by the courts. Now, the courts may also find that athletes are employees and force the schools to pay them, and Kavenaugh, at the least, seemed to suggest as much, but it is also possible that five Supreme Court justices will not find athletes to be employees, and that the status quo will be allowed to continue.
BC
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - 2006alum - 01-04-2022
BTW, if that were to happen, the big winner will be taxpayers. Suddenly all that scholarship income is taxable, not just the part that goes to meals and lodging (and which I'm guessing most students currently don't pay taxes on, though they should). The schools will need to start paying payroll taxes for the students, and students will need to have have a large chunk withheld for state and federal taxes + SSI & Medicare.
The second biggest winner will be unions, since I would imagine there will be a big push to unionize student-athletes and fold them into some of the existing unions that cover graduate student workers. That would really swell the ranks of the unions that have traditionally incorporated student employees.
And BTW, the biggest loser may actually be women's sports. Once they're considered employees, I'm actually doubtful that Title IX would continue to apply as it currently does, because Title IX's 1:1 scholarship:student gender ratio mandate stems from the NCAA's oversight of student-athlete scholarships. But once they are considered employees, the NCAA probably would not have grounds to enforce the terms of contracts between schools and their employees. And I'm doubtful whether that kind of employment would be considered "educational programs or activities" under Title IX any more than being hired as a resident assistant, a research assistant, or a TA is. And as far as I know, none of those forms of employment has traditionally fallen within the dictates of Title IX's 1:1 matching system.
However problematic the current system is, I have yet to hear any persuasive arguments for why the "students are employees" universe will be better, and I think a lot of the folks who push this rhetoric have not actually thought it through...
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - teejers1 - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 06:47 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Instead, the NCAA was forced to allowed NIL money, and that is never going away. It has the transfer portal and that is never going away. Now, all it needs is one case by a player who "had to take an NIL deal the school arranged for me because the school wouldn't pay me directly, and fulfilling the NIL deal obligations compromised the time I had to spend on improving my academic performance." When that happens, the NCAA will lose that case too, and be told schools have to pay the athletes and stop with arranging others to do it for them. Then the NCAA will ask how they are suppose to do that, and the courts will say that is your problem, figure it out. The NLRB has already said it will now classify college athletes as employees. https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/nlrb-general-counsel-jennifer-abruzzo-issues-memo-on-employee-status-of
I don't think you're hypothetical case will materialize because NIL is literally "free money." These kids are getting the equivalent of cash stuffed in their helmets during "The Walk." They don't do anything for their NIL monies, other than being (a) enrolled at donor's preferred school, and (b) on the team. I've always imagined the case percolating through the courts would be a disgruntled player who DOESN'T have an NIL deal and views tuition, room, and board as insufficient compensation for an "employee."
Again, the answer is (a) NFL D-League, (b) more regulation (including on coaching salaries), not less, and © less mandatory time for student-athletes to spend on their collegiate sport with enforcement of same. If the NFL views such as non-beneficial to the growth/excellence of their future employees, then that may incentivize the them to actually establish their own D-League where aspiring footballers can spend "full time" on that "job."
Make the distinction between NCAA football and pro football more real; and reserve collegiate sports for those who want to play collegiate sports and all that entails. I think everyone would be surprised how just fine college sports would be in this "pared back" universe. And the NFL would be fine, too.
RE: lex24 - Farm93 - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 08:26 AM)81alum Wrote:FWIW - I hope it does go that far. The exploitation of student athletes in parts of the USA is very hard to watch. These attempts to exploit the workforce will continue, but at least the athletes can get compensation for risking their bodies, and in some cases minds.(01-03-2022, 10:23 PM)lex24 Wrote: Mixed feelings. Not crazy about college free agency. But I also think kids should be able to go where they want.Stanford will inevitably lose in a world in which all commitment on the part of student athletes is obliterated. Stanford will never be able to compete in the free agent game, because its academic standards sharply restrict "freedom of movement" between universities. Complete free agency will ultimately make it impossible for Stanford to be competitive in revenue sports. Let's hope it doesn't get that far.
Then there is the other matter. Personally, I would not enjoy backing a team composed of carpetbaggers who did not share the Stanford experience with me and who come and go too quickly for me to become attached to them. It is for this reason that I completely lost interest in professional sports. Now I see college sports importing the same interest-killing innovation.
Fortunately, Stanford is good at a lot of non revenue sports, so there will still be teams for me to root for, since Stanford will retain its advantages in sports that were never about a payday. But I fear deeply for football and MBB.
Even with the current use of the transfer portal it is hard to imagine Stanford thriving. When there are even more organized NILs, substantial university salaries or potentially ticket revenue sharing from their gate, and it will be even harder for Stanford to stay competitive.
Still, I can't support the exploitation of student-athletes nationwide just for Stanford to do a bit better in football. If the athletes can obtain economic benefit from their activities then that's what they should be allowed to do in our free market economy even if my alma mater ends up as a net loser in this more open compensation model.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - dabigv13 - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 12:20 PM)2006alum Wrote: However problematic the current system is, I have yet to hear any persuasive arguments for why the "students are employees" universe will be better, and I think a lot of the folks who push this rhetoric have not actually thought it through...
Great post and agree wholeheartedly that the long view is not being taken. It might be unfair for current football players to not get paid market rates for the profits they are generating, but that system has subsidized college sports for years, and improving it for college football players will seemingly necessarily blow big holes in the budgets of every other sport.
In a student athlete as employee system, wouldn't most schools just drop a lot of the nonrevenue sports, women's or men's? If Stanford was about to drop a bunch of sports for funding reasons, factoring in athlete pay and benefits would seemingly be a whole lot worse.
Could you pay football players but not soccer players? Doesn't seem like there's a way to preserve most sports in an employment model.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - M T - 01-04-2022
Is someone looking at the people/organizations that are providing the money for NIL? Are they treating it properly taxwise? Exactly what are the athletes doing for the payer that is considered work? Or is it a gift (for which there are tax consequences once limits are hit)? Are those payers to be considered the employers? The NIL is coming from those payers, and not the schools. The schools (except maybe a few cases) probably are not paying NIL nor funneling NIL. Moreover, the schools arguably aren't necessarily getting any direct benefit out of NIL being paid. I'm not knowledgeable in this field, but I'd guess the athletes receiving NIL would be viewed as independent contractors.
When viewed that way, NIL may be orthogonal to Title IX, if the college is not considered the employer.
There was a recent question here as to why Stanford might "waste" a scholarship for an athlete from a wealthy family. Certainly you could say the same thing about a player who is getting 6 or 7 figures of NIL. Then you get onto the slippery slope of what a college or its employee (coach) (or maybe even supporter) does to facilitate the payment of NIL, potentially in lieu of a scholarship. Does that put the college in a different situation w.r.t. being an employer? And that could lead to deciding that students paying their way because of NIL still count as scholarships for Title IX purposes.
Lots of messy issues.
RE: lex24 - teejers1 - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 01:18 PM)Farm93 Wrote: FWIW - I hope it does go that far. The exploitation of student athletes in parts of the USA is very hard to watch. These attempts to exploit the workforce will continue, but at least the athletes can get compensation for risking their bodies, and in some cases minds.
Yes, the exploitation is so difficult to watch. Imagine a world where there was no college scholarships for thousands and thousands of football-playing young men from all economic stripes across this great nation. Then they wouldn't have their brains scrambled all for the visceral pleasure of strangers. Instead, those young men, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, could just edify their mind, body and soul via regular college life . . . oh . . . wait a second.
And for the umpteenth time, the individual, per se, isn't driving NIL payments - it's the fact that said individual happens to play for university that donor supports. That is true for overwhelming majority of NIL deals we read about.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - BostonCard - 01-04-2022
The NCAA could take steps to improve student/athlete welfare, but it would probably cost money. Go back to 11 game seasons. Ditch weekday games. Ditto Pac-12 after dark. Decrease the proliferation of bowl games. Adopt rules to decrease the number of plays in a game. Make signing days at the best time for the student/athletes, not the coaches. Pay for healthcare for injuries that continue after their playing days are done (including CTE). Have student representatives for major decision making. There are all sorts of things that the NCAA could do to show that they put student/athlete welfare ahead of $$. But they won't.
BC
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - qwerty49 - 01-04-2022
(01-04-2022, 07:28 AM)Phogge Wrote: Or the school can say that it is not giving in and is tired of being a minor league for the NFL and is tired of seeing its students suffer from long term mental impairment. Take the alumni hit and the donation hit and move on doing what its primary mission is.
Wait a minute -- are you implying our primary mission is NOT to win the Sears/Directors Cup with neither FB nor MBB contributing meaningfully to our point total?
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - 82lsju - 01-14-2022
interesting read on NIL at WSU...
Quote:The NIL package for Ward, who starred at FCS Incarnate Word the last two seasons, was crafted in a whirlwind of collaboration late last week and over the weekend among dozens of WSU alums, including an array of one-time Cougar football players.
...
“Paul called and said, one, FCS or FBS, Cameron Ward is the real deal. And two, he knows on good authority that NIL considerations are a very real part of his recruitment at some other schools,” Thompson said.
https://247sports.com/college/washington-state/Article/How-WSU-football-luminaries-came-together-for-Cameron-Ward-NIL-deal-180401349/?g2i_eui=%2fM6OhYDmKiHoQEAxq86NTADY8x1sTmfL&g2i_source=newsletter&lctg=14F514FCF585D5B4B44B24C942&active=no
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - OutsiderFan - 01-14-2022
It would be so much easier if athletics-derived revenue were taxed and schools had to pay the labor. No tax exempt status. Booster donations get no tax credit.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - TrumpCard - 01-14-2022
(01-14-2022, 02:12 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: It would be so much easier if athletics-derived revenue were taxed and schools had to pay the labor. No tax exempt status. Booster donations get no tax credit.
I'm not totally unreceptive to this sort of argument, but I don't think it's simple. Would scholarships to athletes also be taxable? Same for need blind financial aid to people who play on sports teams? You get my drift. There are lots of ways to game the system and cutting out all the loopholes leads to overcorrection and creates gaps in financial aid for worthy applicants.
lex24 - lex24 - 01-14-2022
(01-04-2022, 01:18 PM)Farm93 Wrote:(01-04-2022, 08:26 AM)81alum Wrote:FWIW - I hope it does go that far. The exploitation of student athletes in parts of the USA is very hard to watch. These attempts to exploit the workforce will continue, but at least the athletes can get compensation for risking their bodies, and in some cases minds.(01-03-2022, 10:23 PM)lex24 Wrote: Mixed feelings. Not crazy about college free agency. But I also think kids should be able to go where they want.Stanford will inevitably lose in a world in which all commitment on the part of student athletes is obliterated. Stanford will never be able to compete in the free agent game, because its academic standards sharply restrict "freedom of movement" between universities. Complete free agency will ultimately make it impossible for Stanford to be competitive in revenue sports. Let's hope it doesn't get that far.
Then there is the other matter. Personally, I would not enjoy backing a team composed of carpetbaggers who did not share the Stanford experience with me and who come and go too quickly for me to become attached to them. It is for this reason that I completely lost interest in professional sports. Now I see college sports importing the same interest-killing innovation.
Fortunately, Stanford is good at a lot of non revenue sports, so there will still be teams for me to root for, since Stanford will retain its advantages in sports that were never about a payday. But I fear deeply for football and MBB.
Even with the current use of the transfer portal it is hard to imagine Stanford thriving. When there are even more organized NILs, substantial university salaries or potentially ticket revenue sharing from their gate, and it will be even harder for Stanford to stay competitive.
Still, I can't support the exploitation of student-athletes nationwide just for Stanford to do a bit better in football. If the athletes can obtain economic benefit from their activities then that's what they should be allowed to do in our free market economy even if my alma mater ends up as a net loser in this more open compensation model.
Playing college sports is not work. Period. And Universities are not going to pay a “salary” to athletes. Period. So, end the whole thing. End college sports. And then answer this - where do they go? Where do they play? How does that benefit the 99.9 % of kids that play a college sport while attending school with no thought of or ability to play professionally?
I’m all for NIL. Everyone should, if able, be able to make money off their name and likeness. But I’m not much of a fan of the portal, because it’s being abused. And I will never buy the “exploited college athlete/worker” bit. Because no one is forcing them to play. If they want a job instead, go get one.
RE: The stench you smell is the transfer portal - Treebound - 01-14-2022
As usual, all or most are acting in their own self interest. The NCAA and others could have course corrected long ago, but they were too tied to the structure and the money they derived from it. As another poster stated, "We now have the wild west." I don't blame these kids for trying to maximize their near term income, nor do I blame the football factories for trying to take advantage of the NIL loop holes to entice these athletes to their "schools."
It's an arms race that we/Stanford won't wade into in an organized fashion. How many years did it take for us to make a coach one of Stanford's top 5 income earners (I can't recall the name of the IRS form where that is disclosed)? This was a great debate with Bowlsby when we feared losing Harbaugh before the Orange Bowl. We will watch this fiasco from the sidelines, even though I'm sure a number of wealthy alums could be organized to build out an NIL war chest that could rival most. That's not the Stanford way, and on this topic, I'm fine with it...for now. We are not a football factory first and we never have been.