Is the NCAA's claimed "amateurism" actually real? SCOTUS doesn't seem to think so

[MplsGopher]

https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...n-whether-amateurism-concept-holds-up-at-all/

NCAA has rough day at Supreme Court as justices question whether amateurism concept holds up at all​

"Why does the NCAA get to define what 'pay' is?" asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Why, indeed? At that point, the NCAA was being hung by its own rules manual that states over and over that the athlete experience should be as close to the regular student experience as possible.

The regular student can have its own YouTube channel, be in a band, earn thousands from social media exposure. NCAA athletes are limited to room, books, board, tuition and cost of attendance.

Nearly all the justices poked at the NCAA's reasoning for limiting compensation.

"Antitrust laws should not be a cover for exploitation of the student-athletes, so that is a concern, an overarching concern here," said Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

...

Athletes have been earning exorbitant amounts of money for years. There is cost of attendance that ranges between $2,000-$5,000 per academic year. Bowl gifts are capped at $550. Schools are allowed to pay insurance premiums to protect players' draft value that are worth $80,000 or more.

"That," Justice John Roberts said, "sounds like pay for play."

 

[short ornery norwegian]

to be clear - the case in question involves whether the NCAA has the right to limit the so-called educational benefits that student-athletes may receive. The plaintiff is a former college FB player. His contention is that a 'regular' college student is not subject to the same limitations as scholarship athletes.

this is not the NIL (name, image, likeness) issue. that is a separate matter that is still being reviewed by the NCAA.

But, a finding for the plaintiff could put the NCAA in a difficult spot.

 

[MplsGopher]

The NCAA and schools are afraid to death that if you take away the (fake) label of "amateur", the golden goose is killed.

That goose being: how do you get people to care about minor league teams in any way close to how they care about the top professional league teams?

The answer, they discovered, was to slap a university's name across the front of the uniforms.


I think it's just laughably silly that massive numbers of people will stop watching college student-athletes play for university the teams they dearly love, just because they're suddenly students who receive a paycheck -- you know, like the students who work at the pizza place.

Some trolls will loudly pretend to proclaim that they won't. But that's a show.

 

[Ope3]

I think it's just laughably silly that massive numbers of people will stop watching college student-athletes play for university the teams they dearly love, just because they're suddenly students who receive a paycheck -- you know, like the students who work at the pizza place.

Some trolls will loudly pretend to proclaim that they won't. But that's a show.

I don't know if people will stop watching because the players are getting a paycheck, but fans/followers/alums of programs that just don't have the resources to compensate their Athlete/Students as much (or remotely as much) as their competitors may just check out in massive numbers.

Obviously there are already gaps between haves/have-nots, but if it gets massively wider, I would find it hard to believe the current D1 models would exist as they do now.

 

[Angry]

The NCAA and schools are afraid to death that if you take away the (fake) label of "amateur", the golden goose is killed.

That goose being: how do you get people to care about minor league teams in any way close to how they care about the top professional league teams?

College basketball is a vastly superior product to the NBA. NFL is better than college football. I don’t see those two things changing anytime soon.

 

[GoodasGold]

.


I think it's just laughably silly that massive numbers of people will stop watching college student-athletes play for university the teams they dearly love, just because they're suddenly students who receive a paycheck -- you know, like the students who work at the pizza place.
.

True but if they start failing to call blatant travels, I’m out!

 

[MplsGopher]

I don't know if people will stop watching because the players are getting a paycheck, but fans/followers/alums of programs that just don't have the resources to compensate their Athlete/Students as much (or remotely as much) as their competitors may just check out in massive numbers.

Obviously there are already gaps between haves/have-nots, but if it gets massively wider, I would find it hard to believe the current D1 models would exist as they do now.

Mega departments (Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Texas, Texas A&M, etc.) should have their own division in football, in that case.

Agree that Minnesota is unlikely to ever be able to match that in terms of dollars. Would have absolutely no problem still following the team if it "only" competing in football against the Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Virginia Tech, Arizona, etc. level programs of the P5 world.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Again, my issue with this is that it will not only create haves and have-nots between schools, it will create haves and have-nots between athletes.

Chip Scoggins has a column in the Strib about Paige Bueckers, including info on how popular she is on Instagram and Tik-Tok. If she is allowed to monetize all those followers, she could make more money on that than she will make in salary in the WNBA.

On the flip side, if star athletes can make money for themselves, it will theoretically reduce the temptation to take under-the-table payments from Cheating School X. if Joe Stud can make money off his NIL, he doesn't need that shoe box full of cash from Friendly Booster Bob.

 

[howeda7]

It seems they could head this off by saying any athlete can sign endorsement deals and earn up to say $10K/year from such endorsements while maintaining eligible status. That caps it to prevent bidding wars while also reducing the temptation to take $ under the table.

 

[MplsGopher]

It seems they could head this off by saying any athlete can sign endorsement deals and earn up to say $10K/year from such endorsements while maintaining eligible status. That caps it to prevent bidding wars while also reducing the temptation to take $ under the table.

There has to be reasonable limits on how much a college athlete can earn from the NIL.

Otherwise, I guarantee there will be wealthy business owners chomping at the bit to give "endorsement" deals, which they neither expect to, nor care if they, increase their sales from the ad, merely as a legal way to funnel six figures of cash to star football and basketball players. Who knows, could get to seven. People are nuts.

 

[Wally]

I don't know if people will stop watching because the players are getting a paycheck, but fans/followers/alums of programs that just don't have the resources to compensate their Athlete/Students as much (or remotely as much) as their competitors may just check out in massive numbers.

Obviously there are already gaps between haves/have-nots, but if it gets massively wider, I would find it hard to believe the current D1 models would exist as they do now.

Equity in college sports is already laughable.

 

[Ope3]

It seems they could head this off by saying any athlete can sign endorsement deals and earn up to say $10K/year from such endorsements while maintaining eligible status. That caps it to prevent bidding wars while also reducing the temptation to take $ under the table.

I don't see how limiting players players to $10,000 while a head coach can make millions is justified. It's still restraint of trade, just a different amount.

 

[MplsGopher]

I don't see how limiting players players to $10,000 while a head coach can make millions is justified. It's still restraint of trade, just a different amount.

I don't think the spirit of your argument is wrong.

But if you put zero restraints on what NIL deals can be offered and accepted by college players, then it will just be putting an even wider gap between the haves and have nots.

Texas, Alabama, etc., ie the schools with the highest coefficient of fans who are wealthy (enough) and willing to give that money away to college athletes playing for their school, are going to be the ones able to "buy off" the players with the most insane "endorsement" deals.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

The goal of the amateurism model is (in my damaged mind) mostly about keeping a relatively level playing field. Yes, we all know that’s not quite the reality but there are examples of programs crawling up and down the hierarchy over the years and this should be preserved. Winning programs and coaches attract a disproportionate share of blue chip recruits. Deregulating College sports would be a **** show and create a permanent hierarchy far beyond what exists today. Personally, I have slowly stopped watching all pro sports (unless in a social setting) so that’s where I’m coming from.

My literally thirty second “solution“ slash sociology experiment to creating a more level playing field: assign individual player payments *cough* cost of attendance, or equality payments or whatever euphemism we want to come up with from a giant pot of NCAA money with contributions/tax, from each conference according to their revenue. The worst, most losing teams over say a 5 year period average draw from this pot and distribute funds to their players. The championship team players get nothing, the big losers get $, say 20k each, with a sliding scale from top to bottom. That’s a decent amount of money to a college kid. Would it sway blue chippers? Would it create equity? Would college kids get a better sense of communistic politics?

 

[MplsGopher]

^^^ I would rather see a P5 draft. I don't buy the argument for a second of people freaking out over not allowing kids to go to the school they want to go. They mostly don't give a crap about school. And if you really do care about school ... then go back to school, after you're done playing. You most likely won't be in the NFL, and if you do make it still only a few years average career. Plenty of time to go to whatever school you wanted to go to.

NFL draft is the best thing in pro sports.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I would expect that the NCAA will still have to regulate the NIL to this extent - I predict a rule that schools cannot promise NIL income as part of the recruiting process - as in "come to our school and Casa Del Autos will pay you $$$ to do ads for them." That would really turn recruiting into a cesspool. (assuming it's not already a cesspool).

The NIL income will have to be separated from the recruiting process. Prompting the question of whether players will be able to make a deal with an agent to represent them for NIL opportunities.

the devil is always in the details.

(Can't wait for the ads with Faalele for the Big and Tall Men's store.....)

 

[Wally]

The goal of the amateurism model is (in my damaged mind) mostly about keeping a relatively level playing field.

Amateur Coaches then to, why not?

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Amateur Coaches then to, why not?

I’ve long argued for a salary cap on staff, if nothing else. We can have pretend communism in our amateur sports, like we have pretend combat in football.