Outside Topic OT: The rich getting richer in college football - 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: Outside Topic OT: The rich getting richer in college football (/thread-22108.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: Outside Topic OT: The rich getting richer in college football (/thread-22108.html)
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - Goose - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 06:34 AM)2006alum Wrote:There are a lot of people who won't want to watch or care about "semi-pro" sports as college athletics. However, there are enough people (or so many think) like in SEC country who will still watch. However, I think the chaotic financial incentives and "buying" preferred walk-ons and God alone knows what else will make even this new model impossible to control. After all, the conferences and the NCAA didn't come into existence for no reason. It certainly wasn't to benefit the players, as they had no voice in the matter. Some form of regulation will be required. The colleges can either attempt to design what they want or eventually allow some DC lobbyist to dictate it, but it will happen in some form. Hopefully the colleges will see the light and get ahead of the problem. Not counting on that though.(08-12-2021, 08:58 PM)Goose Wrote: I think all of college athletics will decide that the present situation is not viable. I would not use the word "corrupt". The present situation is the product of law. BYU and others are pushing the boundaries to see what, if anything, is now inadmissible. Once this process is complete, or even before, the colleges need to seek legislative relief. If they don't, college athletics is all over IMHO.
+1. I've always thought the advent of lawful NIL rights would be the end of amateur college athletics. Didn't quite expect how much that would turbo charge things, but certainly my interest is waning by the day the more the blatant money grabs (UT and the Sooners to the SEC, BYU's effectively limitless scholarship limit, etc.) make clear this is just a moneyed arms race built on a foundation lacking any principles whatsoever. As much as everyone spat on the NCAA, it was a good run while we had it.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - 82lsju - 08-13-2021
(08-12-2021, 08:52 PM)DenverCard Wrote: Re BostonCard's observation that the new NIL rules put an end to scholarship limits, is there anything to stop a school from sponsoring it's own "walk-ons"? Wearing the jersey represents his endorsement of the school. Sure, it could get expensive for the college, but if it's a way to get a few extra defensive lineman in a particularly good recruiting year for that position, it would be a smart investment.
Seriously, though, the way that BYU circumvented scholarship limits stands to have a much greater impact on basketball than football, as in basketball one or two extra recruits can have a tremendous impact. Stands to redefine the term, "preferred walk-on."
Add me to the chorus of those who believe that as the NIL changes play out in ever-more blatant ways, Stanford will decide the situation is simply too corrupt to abide.
or a big donor/sponsor could have a deal to "top up" partial scholarship sports, if say all the Stanford baseball players (or pick you sport with some players not on full scholarships) became full scholarships via an NIL deal that would seem to be pretty attractive....
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - gailtate - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 07:13 AM)Goose Wrote:(08-13-2021, 06:34 AM)2006alum Wrote:There are a lot of people who won't want to watch or care about "semi-pro" sports as college athletics. However, there are enough people (or so many think) like in SEC country who will still watch. However, I think the chaotic financial incentives and "buying" preferred walk-ons and God alone knows what else will make even this new model impossible to control. After all, the conferences and the NCAA didn't come into existence for no reason. It certainly wasn't to benefit the players, as they had no voice in the matter. Some form of regulation will be required. The colleges can either attempt to design what they want or eventually allow some DC lobbyist to dictate it, but it will happen in some form. Hopefully the colleges will see the light and get ahead of the problem. Not counting on that though.(08-12-2021, 08:58 PM)Goose Wrote: I think all of college athletics will decide that the present situation is not viable. I would not use the word "corrupt". The present situation is the product of law. BYU and others are pushing the boundaries to see what, if anything, is now inadmissible. Once this process is complete, or even before, the colleges need to seek legislative relief. If they don't, college athletics is all over IMHO.
+1. I've always thought the advent of lawful NIL rights would be the end of amateur college athletics. Didn't quite expect how much that would turbo charge things, but certainly my interest is waning by the day the more the blatant money grabs (UT and the Sooners to the SEC, BYU's effectively limitless scholarship limit, etc.) make clear this is just a moneyed arms race built on a foundation lacking any principles whatsoever. As much as everyone spat on the NCAA, it was a good run while we had it.
Had the no-ops in the NCAA and the Conferences been doggedly and aggressively pursuing their chartered mission(s), this whole issue would not be plaguing us today.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - Goose - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 10:56 AM)gailtate Wrote: Had the no-ops in the NCAA and the Conferences been doggedly and aggressively pursuing their chartered mission(s), this whole issue would not be plaguing us today.Probably very true. Hopefully the actual problems created by their failure will get the attention of enough competent college administrators (risking an oxymoron) who will do better.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - Maple Leaf - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 12:44 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-13-2021, 10:56 AM)gailtate Wrote: Had the no-ops in the NCAA and the Conferences been doggedly and aggressively pursuing their chartered mission(s), this whole issue would not be plaguing us today.Probably very true. Hopefully the actual problems created by their failure will get the attention of enough competent college administrators (risking an oxymoron) who will do better.
now if the SEC and friends start to feel threaten by another conference or region of the country which has more financial resources to commit then we might see action on fixing this mess...........gee on the West Coast there is both the tech and the entertainment industries which have been known to generate some $$$, here is where the PAC 12 might just prevail.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - Mick - 08-13-2021
(08-12-2021, 06:12 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-12-2021, 05:37 PM)BostonCard Wrote:Certainly they can. Almost all (actually all I know about) Catholic grade schools and high schools do as well. The theory is that your contributions to the Church as a member make up the difference, so it is "fair".(08-12-2021, 01:59 PM)82lsju Wrote: BYU tuition/year
LDS $6,120
non-LDS $12,240
https://finserve.byu.edu/students-parents/tuition-fees-deadlines#richtext-2021-2022-tuiti
Interesting; I didn't realize that BYU could legally charge differently by religion.
BC
That's interesting. I've gone to Catholic grade schools, high schools and Universities all my life, as have my kids, and I haven't experienced that yet. My kids' high school was 40% non-Catholic, here's their statement on tuition costs:
https://www.bcp.org/admissions/businessoffice/tuition
Of course both my kids' high school and my alma mater (SCU) were Jesuit, so maybe they treat tuition differently than educational institutions supported by other orders.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - Goose - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 02:18 PM)Mick Wrote: Of course both my kids' high school and my alma mater (SCU) were Jesuit, so maybe they treat tuition differently than educational institutions supported by other orders.
For example, take a look at https://www.bishopgorman.org/admissions/tuition-fees-and-assistance. When I was there the tuition was lots lower and the Parish contribution actually was about 50% of the tuition. Another example https://stannesea.org/admissions-2/group-5/. I never attended there, but I can say for sure they monitor these things LOTS closer than they did when most of the faculty were nuns. They were real cheap so it didn't matter much. Not true now.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - TreeWeird - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 02:37 PM)Goose Wrote:(08-13-2021, 02:18 PM)Mick Wrote: Of course both my kids' high school and my alma mater (SCU) were Jesuit, so maybe they treat tuition differently than educational institutions supported by other orders.
For example, take a look at https://www.bishopgorman.org/admissions/tuition-fees-and-assistance. When I was there the tuition was lots lower and the Parish contribution actually was about 50% of the tuition. Another example https://stannesea.org/admissions-2/group-5/. I never attended there, but I can say for sure they monitor these things LOTS closer than they did when most of the faculty were nuns. They were real cheap so it didn't matter much. Not true now.
Catholic schools will vary. My kids' catholic elementary school allowed us to pay less in direct tuition - but only by paying the balance as a "contribution" to one of the parishes in the diocese. But we had to be registered with the parish, the parish tracked the contributions, and we had to show regular attendance at Mass. The advantage is that the "contribution" to the church was tax deductible whereas tuition is not. A tax loophole that should be closed if it hasn't been already, although we took advantage of it ourselves. Its similar to using a "contribution" to pay for better athletic seats, although I think the rules on that have gotten tighter, haven't they?
Not every school in the diocese did this, nor did every parish participate. The financial health of each school varied, and some pastors did not like the idea, particularly if their own parish did not have a school. But even with some autonomy for each school and parish, the system could work because ultimately they all report to the local diocese. In the case of schools run by one of the catholic orders (e.g., Jesuits, Brothers of Holy Cross, etc), they run their school independent of the diocese and they set their own tuition and policies.
In the case of LDS and BYU, I'm just speculating, but I'd guess the connection between the two is pretty tight and any LDS student or family getting the "discount" needs to show active participation and tithing.
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - 82lsju - 08-13-2021
(08-13-2021, 05:02 PM)TreeWeird
[size=small' Wrote: In the case of LDS and BYU, I'm just speculating, but I'd guess the connection between the two is pretty tight and any LDS student or family getting the "discount" needs to show active participation and tithing. [/size]
Quote:Tuition and general fees for all academic programs are established annually by Brigham Young University. BYU is a non-profit corporation affiliated with the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and significant portions of university operating costs are paid with the tithes of Church members. In recognition of this support, Church members are assessed lower tuition fees than those who are not members. This practice is similar in principle to that of state universities charging higher tuition to nonresidents. Students are considered members of the Church if they have been baptized at any time during the semester or term.
https://finserve.byu.edu/students-parents/tuition-fees-deadlines#richtext-2021-2022-tuiti
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - 82lsju - 08-31-2021
(08-02-2021, 12:55 PM)DC 86 Wrote:(07-29-2021, 07:09 PM)82lsju Wrote:(07-29-2021, 06:32 PM)M T Wrote:Quote:Ewers’ parents, Curtis and Kristen, want Quinn to stay in school, but the state’s UIL informed the family that if he made money off his name, image, and likeness, it would violate the state’s legislation on NIL. Ewers wouldn’t be able to sign with any companies until he is done playing sports in high school.
Hmm... I like "stay in school" meaning to stay in high school. It suggests they know what will happen when he goes NIL and plays football for some university.
I expect he can make money off his name, image, likeness, but then can't play football or other sports in high school under the state legislation. Heck, he might even go from BOMC to being ostracized if he quits the high school team and stayed in high school, earning NIL.
I thought it was interesting that there was no mention as to whether he would graduate from high school, or whether a failure to graduate would impact his enrollment at whatever University that wants him.
Edit: At the end, it does say he needs only 1 online English class to graduate. Elsewhere I read that he gets good grades.
Did the courts rule that the NCAA can no longer require passing classes as part of eligibility for playing sports? Or did they find that any impairment of their right to get paid would be illegal? I might have missed the severing of the link of education to playing for a educational institution.
so he can "go Pro" at tOSU now or in Jan 2022, not sure how much waiting three months costs him (well unless he has a terrible injury), and if he enrolls now he'll burn a year of eligibility (probably a redshirt year this season) vs enrolling in Jan 2022. And if he has to complete the on-line English course he may end up reporting later than the other incoming Frosh (I have no idea how on-line course work, maybe he can essentially test out of it in one day).....of course tOSU has two four star and one five star QB on their roster now so if Ewers does who up this fall how many of transfer....
and how long before NIL trickles down to high school football, especially in Texas where some schools draw tens of thousands of people to each game......
Ewers announced this morning that he is going to enroll at Ohio State a year early.
Quote:Blue-chip Ohio State quarterback recruit Quinn Ewers has struck an autograph deal with GT Sports Marketing to a name, image and likeness rights deal, which ESPN reports will pay Ewers $1.4 million over three years,
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ohio-state-freshman-qb-quinn-ewers-signs-1-4-million-nil-deal-with-autograph-vendor-per-reports/
RE: OT: The rich getting richer in college football - BostonCard - 08-31-2021
Tangentially related (I didn't want to start a new thread), this report about a bogus high school is quite something...
https://www.dispatch.com/story/sports/high-school/football/2021/08/30/bishop-sycamore-high-school-football-game-espn-raises-questions-columbus-ohio-img/5649518001/
Quote:Bishop Sycamore — which lists Columbus as its location, though there's no address on the website, and the "About Us" and "Staff" pages on the site are blank — was overmatched from the beginning as it took on the No. 1 team in the country.
...
It isn't clear if Bishop Sycamore is a school at all for the 2021-22 school year.
The Ohio Department of Education lists no charter school by that name, but last year the department listed Bishop Sycamore as a "non-chartered, non-tax supported school," a type of school that "because of truly held religious beliefs, choose to not be chartered by the State Board of Education."
Each non-chartered, non-tax supported school must certify in a report to parents at the start of each school year that it meets the Ohio school operating standards in a report that must be filed with the Ohio Department of Education. No one from the department's communications office returned a telephone call Monday, and it was unclear if Bishop Sycamore filed that report.
Non-chartered, non-tax supported schools must report their students' participation and attendance to their local school district treasurer, which for Bishop Sycamore the state lists as Columbus City Schools.
Jacqueline Bryant, Columbus City Schools spokeswoman, said Tuesday the district has no record that Bishop Sycamore submitted any reports to it, nor could it locate Bishop Sycamore in a directory of schools maintained by the state.
The state lists Bishop Sycamore's mailing address as a post office box, and its "physical address" as 3599 Chiller Lane in Columbus — the address of Resolute Athletic Complex, an indoor sports facility near Easton Town Center.
An official there who didn't want to be named said a football team-sized group of about 30 kids work out in the complex's weight room and turf fields about once a month, but no school classes have ever been located at the site.
This smells like a fraud, and it is the sort of thing you get when you have nationally televised high school games (why?) whose setup is outsourced to an event company (Paragon entertainment) that is more interested in generating views than educating students.
BC