What's stopping schools from deciding en masse to pay people, but then stop full ride scholarships and instead pay their athletes what their tuition would be?
Labor laws, for one. Remember, the gooseshit term "student-athlete" was created for the sole purpose of removing their liability for workman's compensation.
What's stopping schools from deciding en masse to pay people, but then stop full ride scholarships and instead pay their athletes what their tuition would be?
It's the same problem.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
Options
Dhalphirdon't you open that trapdooryou're a fool if you dareRegistered Userregular
What's stopping schools from deciding en masse to pay people, but then stop full ride scholarships and instead pay their athletes what their tuition would be?
the current rules forbid it.
and if they change the rules, the players are mostly worth a lot more than the cost of their tuition, so they'd still be massively underpaying them.
What's stopping schools from deciding en masse to pay people, but then stop full ride scholarships and instead pay their athletes what their tuition would be?
the current rules forbid it.
and if they change the rules, the players are mostly worth a lot more than the cost of their tuition, so they'd still be massively underpaying them.
The current system is designed to extract wealth from the bodies of young athletes.
I was looking forward to the day when I could finally get my own place and get a spiffy internet package. I figured that I'd get it through a cable provider because I could get the Pac-12 Network and watch more UCLA games. I looked around and, at the time, the only provider that had the whole Pac-12 Network (the base and region packages) was AT&T. But a couple months ago when I rechecked, it turns out that AT&T no longer has it at all. The only provider in my area that does carry the full package is Spectrum/Time Warner. So...yeah.
I expect I'll go with that. And then cancel the fuck out of it when Spectrum no longer carries it. Fuck all those assholes.
Florida State University’s Board of Trustees voted Friday to establish a new organization that’ll run the school’s athletic department: The Florida State University Athletics Association. According to the Orlando Sentinel, FSU boasted that the new organization would “streamline the relationship” between the athletics department and boosters, and if that sounds shady as hell, it’s not even the half of it. The move will privatize FSU’s athletics department—essentially giving it all the benefits of being both a private corporation, including shielding it from public scrutiny—while still operating on behalf of a taxpayer-funded institution. Florida State is expecting the changes to take effect by the fall.
Florida State’s privatization is far from the first in Florida, as schools like the University of Florida and University of Central Florida have been benefitting for years from a state law that allows them to classify their athletics programs as “direct-support organizations”—essentially, a private, non-profit corporation separate from the university. In Florida State’s case, this change feels especially egregious in light of a parade of recent scandals and controversies at the school, all of which deserve to be further explained and understood through public record requests. With this new privatization, FSU’s athletics department will be able to decline any public record requests it doesn’t want to answer, taking formerly public records away from outsiders.
There are lots of NCAA member institutions which are not subject to FOIA requests because they're already private schools (Hedgie's alma mater, for one of the more prominent ones). So that wouldn't do it.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
wouldn't it then be easier for students to sue as being un paid employees of this now private organization?
No, because FSU is still a public institution in one way that matters:
Florida State gets these new privileges without one big drawback that usually goes with them—the athletic department still will be subject to an immunity clause that limits any jury judgements or settlements to just $200,000. Anything higher would have to be approved by the state legislature, because it’d be paid by the taxpayers. Obviously, that’s not a perk a private corporation normally enjoys.
Lord_AsmodeusgoeticSobriquet:Here is your magical cryptic riddle-tumour: I AM A TIME MACHINERegistered Userregular
That ought to be illegal.
Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. - Lincoln
Errr, people can still just sue the Corp directly. I'd imagine if it's based on direction from the athletic Dept it would still apply, but then that means they're on the hook for providing smoking gun level evidence of shit to pin on the athletic Dept.
wouldn't it then be easier for students to sue as being un paid employees of this now private organization?
No, because FSU is still a public institution in one way that matters:
Florida State gets these new privileges without one big drawback that usually goes with them—the athletic department still will be subject to an immunity clause that limits any jury judgements or settlements to just $200,000. Anything higher would have to be approved by the state legislature, because it’d be paid by the taxpayers. Obviously, that’s not a perk a private corporation normally enjoys.
I don't see how that keeps them from being subject to wage theft and other wage related laws. It may cap the damages but in theory if you are being "employed" by a private company then there should still be controlled by normal labor practices. They also seemingly lose the fig leaf of the tuition. The private company is not paying your tuition the school is. Severing that connection seems like it opens them up for a lot of trouble if the lawyers can drive it home.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
On the plus side, farming for professional teams will become a lot easier.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
On the plus side, farming for professional teams will become a lot easier.
Not really. The NCAA did a lot to make players easy to abuse.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
This is why I call it a comical bluff. Because it's obviously a bluff.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
This is why I call it a comical bluff. Because it's obviously a bluff.
I fully expect that if this law passes, NCAA legal drags Emmert and the board into a dark room, and explains to them how they're all going to go and vote to repeal NIL restrictions like good little geese, because they all like continued employment, and they're not going to let Emmert fuck that up.
Edit: It's not even a bluff. It's Emmert not grasping that if California passes this law, the NCAA's NIL regulations will cease to be enforceable.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
On the plus side, farming for professional teams will become a lot easier.
Not really. The NCAA did a lot to make players easy to abuse.
I mean that everyone good will try to get into the Cal system.
In a pretty comical bluff, Mark Emmert has written that the NCAA maybe won't let schools in California compete for championship if the bill to allow athletes to have image rights goes through.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
On the plus side, farming for professional teams will become a lot easier.
Not really. The NCAA did a lot to make players easy to abuse.
I mean that everyone good will try to get into the Cal system.
They don't have to. All that will happen is that NIL contracts get signed in California, under California law. And if Emmert is stupid enough to retaliate (he is), the NCAA will be fucked, because this will be a black letter law case.
67456. (a) (1) A postsecondary educational institution shall not uphold any rule, requirement, standard, or other limitation that prevents a student of that institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness. Earning compensation from the use of a student’s name, image, or likeness shall not affect the student’s scholarship eligibility.
(2) An athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, including, but not limited to, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, shall not prevent a student of a postsecondary educational institution participating in intercollegiate athletics from earning compensation as a result of the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.
(3) An athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics, including, but not limited to, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, shall not prevent a postsecondary educational institution from participating in intercollegiate athletics as a result of the compensation of a student athlete for the use of the student’s name, image, or likeness.
(b) A postsecondary educational institution, athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics shall not provide a prospective student athlete with compensation in relation to the athlete’s name, image, or likeness.
(c) (1) A postsecondary educational institution, athletic association, conference, or other group or organization with authority over intercollegiate athletics shall not prevent a California student participating in intercollegiate athletics from obtaining professional representation in relation to contracts or legal matters, including, but not limited to, representation provided by athlete agents or legal representation provided by attorneys.
(2) Professional representation obtained by student athletes shall be from persons licensed by the state. Professional representation provided by athlete agents shall be by persons licensed pursuant to Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 18895) of Division 8 of the Business and Professions Code. Legal representation of student athletes shall be by attorneys licensed pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6000) of Chapter 4 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code.
(3) Athlete agents representing student athletes shall comply with the federal Sports Agent Responsibility and Trust Act, established in Chapter 104 (commencing with Section 7801) of Title 15 of the United States Code, in their relationships with student athletes.
(d) A scholarship from the postsecondary educational institution in which a student is enrolled that provides the student with the cost of attendance at that institution is not compensation for purposes of this section, and a scholarship shall not be revoked as a result of earning compensation or obtaining legal representation pursuant to this section.
(e) For purposes of this section, “postsecondary educational institution” means any campus of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, an independent institution of higher education, as defined in Section 66010, or a private postsecondary educational institution, as defined in Section 94858.
Oh boy. That's going to fuck the motherfucking NCAA from several angles. The only good news for them is that the law only covers students at California colleges, so the absolute worst case scenario (where players from other states come to California to sign contracts under California law, and thus have the ability to sue the NCAA in California courts) can't happen. The bad news is that if this passes, one of two things happens:
1. Come 2023, all the major Division I schools in California will be able to recruit the top players, because they can tell them "play for us, and you can get paid."
2. In response to scenario 1, other states pass their own version of the bill to prevent California from being able to use "get paid" as a recruiting tool.
But that's not all! The law also tears up the NCAA's restriction on agents - once this bill is law, California college students can secure agent representation, and there's not a thing the NCAA can say about it (well, unless they want to be sued.) In addition, the NCAA's odious "restitution rule", which allows the NCAA to punish schools for helping players if the NCAA ultimately wins the case against the player, would be a dead letter as well with regard to NIL rights.
No wonder Emmert had a tantrum - this law would in may ways geld the NCAA.
Posts
Labor laws, for one. Remember, the gooseshit term "student-athlete" was created for the sole purpose of removing their liability for workman's compensation.
It's the same problem.
the current rules forbid it.
and if they change the rules, the players are mostly worth a lot more than the cost of their tuition, so they'd still be massively underpaying them.
The current system is designed to extract wealth from the bodies of young athletes.
It's like they enjoy playing the villain.
What's he gonna do? Join the Trump admin as a Title IX enforcer?
Swim in a giant pile of money.
John Canzano is a columnist for The Oregonian.
And yet we can't pay players.
Fuck the motherfucking NCAA.
I expect I'll go with that. And then cancel the fuck out of it when Spectrum no longer carries it. Fuck all those assholes.
-Indiana Solo, runner of blades
UCLA’s president is one of the three propping him up, and when you consider how he’s kept our AD all this time, it begins to make sense.
3DS: 2981-5304-3227
If you want to see the pics and article, Deadspin has them.
So stupid. He is kicked out/fired/resigned and they still give him courtside seats.
Just for some clarity, since this isn't a politics thread, Alex Caruso played basketball at aTm and is now with the LA Lakers.
And here is the original dumbass post if you want to see all the replies.
Way to go, NCAA!
Chris Murphy is a United States Senator from Connecticut.
Here's the SI piece discussing Senator Murphy's position. And it's good to see a Senator pointing out the uncomfortable truth.
I have 549 Rock Band Drum and 305 Pro Drum FC's
REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS REFS
No, because FSU is still a public institution in one way that matters:
I don't see how that keeps them from being subject to wage theft and other wage related laws. It may cap the damages but in theory if you are being "employed" by a private company then there should still be controlled by normal labor practices. They also seemingly lose the fig leaf of the tuition. The private company is not paying your tuition the school is. Severing that connection seems like it opens them up for a lot of trouble if the lawyers can drive it home.
Oh God, Emmert may kill the NCAA if this law passes, because if it does, every player worth a damn is going out to California to get NIL contracts signed - and Emmert's stupid enough to retaliate.
On the plus side, farming for professional teams will become a lot easier.
Not really. The NCAA did a lot to make players easy to abuse.
This is why I call it a comical bluff. Because it's obviously a bluff.
I fully expect that if this law passes, NCAA legal drags Emmert and the board into a dark room, and explains to them how they're all going to go and vote to repeal NIL restrictions like good little geese, because they all like continued employment, and they're not going to let Emmert fuck that up.
Edit: It's not even a bluff. It's Emmert not grasping that if California passes this law, the NCAA's NIL regulations will cease to be enforceable.
I mean that everyone good will try to get into the Cal system.
They don't have to. All that will happen is that NIL contracts get signed in California, under California law. And if Emmert is stupid enough to retaliate (he is), the NCAA will be fucked, because this will be a black letter law case.
Oh boy. That's going to fuck the motherfucking NCAA from several angles. The only good news for them is that the law only covers students at California colleges, so the absolute worst case scenario (where players from other states come to California to sign contracts under California law, and thus have the ability to sue the NCAA in California courts) can't happen. The bad news is that if this passes, one of two things happens:
1. Come 2023, all the major Division I schools in California will be able to recruit the top players, because they can tell them "play for us, and you can get paid."
2. In response to scenario 1, other states pass their own version of the bill to prevent California from being able to use "get paid" as a recruiting tool.
But that's not all! The law also tears up the NCAA's restriction on agents - once this bill is law, California college students can secure agent representation, and there's not a thing the NCAA can say about it (well, unless they want to be sued.) In addition, the NCAA's odious "restitution rule", which allows the NCAA to punish schools for helping players if the NCAA ultimately wins the case against the player, would be a dead letter as well with regard to NIL rights.
No wonder Emmert had a tantrum - this law would in may ways geld the NCAA.