CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

........on December 18th a Judge will make a ruling. This has the potential to be the beginning of a bidding war between the conferences for recruits and players.



http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/med ... e-athletes

Is this a monopoly lawsuit?

Spence wrote:Is this a monopoly lawsuit?

Antitrust, I believe.

Yep.

Spence wrote:Yep.

I think I’ve got this right......claiming the NCAA can’t set the value its members can compensate players (cost of attendance, meals, stipends, etc).

The issue I see with taking away the scholarship program and replacing it with pay for play is that it is a short sighted approach. Ohio State has 36 varsity sports, They are wholly funded by two sports. Most, almost all those student/athletes will earn a degree and be employed in a vocation other that professional sports. If the Judge considers that issue alone, the NCAA wins. If they just look at those two sports, the NCAA could be in trouble here because as it applies to football and basketball the NCAA and its member schools are not representing their athletes very well when it comes to what they get compared to the money they generate for the schools.

The schools and NCAA , though, could have prevented this if they didn’t have all the stupid amateurism rules. The N promotes their brand and their athlete to milk every last dime they can get but the coach can’t pick up the tab on at McDonald’s if he chooses. Players can’t sell their stuff if they choose, but the NCAA can sell licensing to the players jerseys anytime. They need to get rid of the stupid rules and then make the rules that make sense, then absolutely enforce them.

You do what Spence said and give each player a monthly stipend for incidentals. All caused by testicular atrophy syndrome of College Presidents.

donovan wrote:You do what Spence said and give each player a monthly stipend for incidentals. All caused by testicular atrophy syndrome of College Presidents.

Yes, the are worries about pennies and risking losing dollars to save the pennies.

donovan wrote:You do what Spence said and give each player a monthly stipend for incidentals. All caused by testicular atrophy syndrome of College Presidents.

Yes, the are worries about pennies and risking losing dollars to save the pennies.

I'm not sure I like pay-to-play as a concept. Or at least I wouldn't call it that. I wouldn't mind seeing them fed and given the accessories of life, so they don't have to pay for toilet paper/toothpaste/soap/etc etc....but not really given a salary. I feel like they are trying to turn college into the pros by doing so.

Derek wrote:I'm not sure I like pay-to-play as a concept. Or at least I wouldn't call it that. I wouldn't mind seeing them fed and given the accessories of life, so they don't have to pay for toilet paper/toothpaste/soap/etc etc....but not really given a salary. I feel like they are trying to turn college into the pros by doing so.

I agree, but a scholarship and living expenses. So much a month or week wouldn't be wrong IMO.

Some cash stipend, 300 bucks..something for incidentals. There are kids that could get scholarships but can not take them because they have zero incidental expense support and can not have a job.

donovan wrote:Some cash stipend, 300 bucks..something for incidentals. There are kids that could get scholarships but can not take them because they have zero incidental expense support and can not have a job.

Exactly. Let them be able to have some sort of legal college experience. Maybe it would cut down on some of the darker parts of college sports.

As far as this Court Decision is concerned, I’m hopeful it’s not a step toward legalizing the practices of the old Southwest Conference....... in creating conferences where recruits and players go to the highest bidder.

Mountainman wrote:As far as this Court Decision is concerned, I’m hopeful it’s not a step toward legalizing the practices of the old Southwest Conference....... in creating conferences where recruits and players go to the highest bidder.

That hope is years too late. These conversations are like putting cooked spaghetti back in the box.