NCAA Lawsuit


A place for the discussion of all things not closely related to the sport and its competitive side. (as always, locked for the duration of major international championship)

NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jhc68 » Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:26 am

Now current NCAA players have joined the class-action originally brought by O'Bannon and other former athletes.
The direction of the legal action is to open the door for NCAA athletes to receive a slice of the huge incomes based from football and B-ball gate, TV money and marketing.

Question: Is pay for NCAA athletes any different from the revolution against shamateurism in T&F or other Olympic sports? If so, how and why?
jhc68
 
Posts: 3290
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby gh » Fri Jul 19, 2013 12:27 pm

the NCAA athletes are going after a bigger pot of gold than what's available to pros! :mrgreen:
gh
 
Posts: 46314
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jazzcyclist » Thu Aug 08, 2013 5:48 pm

Uh oh! It looks like the NCAA just got caught with its hands in the cookie jar.

Basketball analyst Jay Bilas loves college sports but is no friend of the NCAA, and that led Tuesday to a fascinating episode on Twitter that added a sidebar to the Johnny Manziel saga.

Bilas posted on his Twitter account a snapshot of the website ShopNCAAsports.com, which was selling replica Texas A&M football jerseys with the No. 2.
The site is affiliated with the NCAA, and includes the organization trademarked logo on the page.

So, nothing to see here, right? All major sports leagues and organizations have online shopping sites.

Except, the NCAA is defending itself in lawsuit filed on behalf of athletes who are demanding compensation from the NCAA, claiming their likeness is being sold on items … like jerseys.

The NCAA has insisted jerseys for sale and likenesses on video games are not connected to specific players. But Bilas typed in “Johnny Manziel” in the search box on the NCAA Shop page and the result was four different Texas A&M replica jerseys, uniform No. 2, which is Manziel’s.


http://www.kansascity.com/2013/08/06/43 ... rylink=cpy

And then there's this:

Thursday morning, Bilas took his public shaming of the NCAA to another level. He found on the same website the NCAA selling a shirt dedicated to Joe Paterno's 400th career win. A win that now doesn't exist thanks to the NCAA's own punishment of Penn State and stripping of Paterno's victories. The NCAA took away 111 of Joe Paterno's wins, taking him from 409 to 298.

http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2013/aug ... ndise.html
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby Jseven1 » Thu Aug 08, 2013 6:01 pm

Why should NCAA coaches get millions, and the ones who actually generate the $$ (the players) get nothing? Force the coaches to share their loot with the players.

You can't sell merchandise associated with a player and then say we (NCAA) gets all the money. some day that will seem as obvious as the Curt Flood free agency decision in baseball.
Jseven1
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:11 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby JumboElliott » Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:00 pm

What about the female athletes who don't generate a dime? Title IX.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby 4hurdles » Fri Aug 09, 2013 7:44 am

The players don't make the school money. If every member of the Ohio State football and basketball team turned pro, or dropped out of school, they would simply go get the next 100 football players or 15 basketball players and the stands would still be full. People cheer for the school uniform, not the player. The coach is often the face of the team because they are often there longer than the student-athlete.

Let's play it forward. Let's say ALL of the players on every BCS team were to leave today. Those teams would simply fill their roster with the "next" set of kids and nobody would skip a beat. The media would identify the best talent and make "stars" out of them and the process would continue.

OR, what if ALL athletic scholarships were eliminated, and student-athletes had to get into school based on academic merit. How many great students in the state of Texas, let's say, can't get into UT because it is highly selective, only to see some 300 lb knucklehead who had to use grade replacement and minimal SAT scores just to be eligible, gets it fully paid for and then cries he needs to get extra money on top of it, even if he is 3rd string and never plays a down.

Do you think if the talent pool dropped in college athletics because there were no athletic scholarships making the schools affordable, and the student-athletes got into school only on academic merit, do you think the stands at UT football games, and KU basketball games won't still be full of paying customers who are proud to cheer for their school as they play against the other schools in their conference who are in the same situation.

You are fooling yourself.

It disgusts me that full scholarship student-athletes who in the large majority of cases wouldn't even be admissable to their great institution, who get pampered with tutors, and gear, and food and travel, and per diem (lots of per diem by the way)and if they are REALLY poor, also pocke $5500 per year in Pell Grant. Yet the media story is that they can't afford to take a date to a movie and for pizza. Yet all of these kids magically have cell phones, and scooters or cars. But yes, the media says they are poor an mistreated.

I'm so tired of it. When will someone tell the real story.
4hurdles
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 2:25 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:02 am

4hurdles, you're not making sense. Whenever college football teams start losing, attendence drops off, bowl revenues go down, alumni donations go down, merchandise sales go down and the local restaurants, bars and hotel lose business as well. If Nick Saban started recruiting one-star athletes instead of five-stars, it would cost the University of Alabama and the city of Tuscaloosa a lot of money.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby TxHottrack » Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:08 am

jazzcyclist wrote:4hurdles, you're not making sense. Whenever college football teams start losing, attendence drops off, bowl revenues go down, alumni donations go down, merchandise sales go down and the local restaurants, bars and hotel lose business as well. If Nick Saban started recruiting one-star athletes instead of five-stars, it would cost the University of Alabama and the city of Tuscaloosa a lot of money.



I agree 110%!
TxHottrack
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby TxHottrack » Fri Aug 09, 2013 8:11 am

4hurdles wrote:The players don't make the school money. If every member of the Ohio State football and basketball team turned pro, or dropped out of school, they would simply go get the next 100 football players or 15 basketball players and the stands would still be full. People cheer for the school uniform, not the player. The coach is often the face of the team because they are often there longer than the student-athlete.

Let's play it forward. Let's say ALL of the players on every BCS team were to leave today. Those teams would simply fill their roster with the "next" set of kids and nobody would skip a beat. The media would identify the best talent and make "stars" out of them and the process would continue.

OR, what if ALL athletic scholarships were eliminated, and student-athletes had to get into school based on academic merit. How many great students in the state of Texas, let's say, can't get into UT because it is highly selective, only to see some 300 lb knucklehead who had to use grade replacement and minimal SAT scores just to be eligible, gets it fully paid for and then cries he needs to get extra money on top of it, even if he is 3rd string and never plays a down.

Do you think if the talent pool dropped in college athletics because there were no athletic scholarships making the schools affordable, and the student-athletes got into school only on academic merit, do you think the stands at UT football games, and KU basketball games won't still be full of paying customers who are proud to cheer for their school as they play against the other schools in their conference who are in the same situation.

You are fooling yourself.

It disgusts me that full scholarship student-athletes who in the large majority of cases wouldn't even be admissable to their great institution, who get pampered with tutors, and gear, and food and travel, and per diem (lots of per diem by the way)and if they are REALLY poor, also pocke $5500 per year in Pell Grant. Yet the media story is that they can't afford to take a date to a movie and for pizza. Yet all of these kids magically have cell phones, and scooters or cars. But yes, the media says they are poor an mistreated.

I'm so tired of it. When will someone tell the real story.



Who to say that the next 15 basketball players or 100 football players are going to be as great as the players you lost? You will need to feel the stands with guys who can get the job done!
TxHottrack
 
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 4:57 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby 4hurdles » Fri Aug 09, 2013 9:46 am

who said anything about losing? you are missing my point. my point is that the school makes the player, the player doesn't make the school. And money for TV comes because of the games, not because of the players. Right now Alabama, Florida have the same access to players as do schools in the MAC. The playing field of resources is not equal, but the playing field of access is. That is why the athletes choose Alabama and Florida because "they are the best."

Let's think it forward in this hypothetical situation.

All Universities and coaches remain in the same conferences and same divisions, but all athletic scholarships are eliminated and you have to get into school based on academic merit.
Alabama and Florida still have access to the same players as the MAC. The playing field is still equal, and the Alabama's and Florida's, at least for now, still have more resources, and are still perceived by the fans, media, high school coaches and recruits to be "the best." So the best athletes of this subset of students (strong academically and with the financial resources, or the understanding of a value of a student loan for the privilege and return of a strong education)will still choose Alabama and Florida. They will still have the best football teams in the land, it is just that they will be filled with players who have the academic merit and financial ability to attend school. Just as every other team in this hypothetical sitation.

I contend that the tailgates will still be strong, and the seats will still be filled, and (at least for now) Alabama will still be winning football championships. The game will still be competitive because the players will be similar. They just will be a different subset of similar players.

The point is, the school makes the player, the player does not make the school. There will still be bowl games and March madness. Ever wonder why college football draws more fans in attendance than pro games? We know the pro teams are more talented. The Jacksonville Jaguars or the Raiders would still be Alabama in a game. So why is the college game so popular, especially in basketball? It is because the fans really love rooting for "their school" moreso than even "their pro tem."

There will still be TV contracts for March Madness etc. The money will still be flowing.
4hurdles
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 2:25 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 09, 2013 12:13 pm

If all the blue chip football talent started bypassing NCAA football, similar to the way it bypasses NCAA baseball, the popularity of 1-A football would fall off. The reason why college football has ratings and attendence on par with pro football is because its stocked with future pro superstars who must spend a minimum of three years playing college football before the get the opportunity to play on Sundays. That's why college baseball doesn't come close to matching the popularity of MLB, and it's why 1-AA football doesn't compare to 1-A football in polularity.

And you wrong about attendence. Not only is the average pro football game attendence higher than the average division 1-A game attendence, but pro stadiums are consistently filled more closer to their maximum capacity than college stadiums. On top of this, pro tickets are considrably more expensive than college tickets, and pro football teams don't have to reserve thousands of free seats for students, faculty and marching bands.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby Dave » Fri Aug 09, 2013 2:32 pm

Does football actually make money for the universities or does it just cover costs.
Dave
 
Posts: 2119
Joined: Sun Aug 20, 2006 3:16 pm

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jhc68 » Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:58 pm

Schools don't make players, players make schools.
jhc68
 
Posts: 3290
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby MJR » Fri Aug 09, 2013 5:25 pm

Dave wrote:Does football actually make money for the universities or does it just cover costs.


Approximately 20 D1 Football teams generate a profit. Every other one operates at a loss. Some of the mid major bowl teams lose over $100k just to attend the game.
MJR
 
Posts: 1813
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: on walkabout....

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jazzcyclist » Fri Aug 09, 2013 5:49 pm

MJR wrote:
Dave wrote:Does football actually make money for the universities or does it just cover costs.


Approximately 20 D1 Football teams generate a profit. Every other one operates at a loss. Some of the mid major bowl teams lose over $100k just to attend the game.

Bullshit! According to the latest available figures, 81 of the NCAA's 1-A football programs operated in the black, 70 made at least $1 million and 40 made at least $10 million. Here's the link to the facts:

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/dataFiles/E ... 1-2012.zip
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:34 am

4 got at least part of this right; I do not want to argue the rest. If you took the various players and put them on non-school, semi-pro teams, they would draw 5000 and would sign a TV contract for $100,000 and pay the coach $75,000. Maybe these numbers are low, but they are not low by a factor of 20.

It is the connection to the schools and the competitive environment that draw the pieces together and make it valuable.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16315
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby JumboElliott » Thu Aug 22, 2013 8:46 pm

Frankly, I hope college football is banned. I love watching it, but it is a societal disease and obviously dangerous.
JumboElliott
 
Posts: 2120
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2011 2:46 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby James Fields » Fri Aug 23, 2013 10:50 pm

JumboElliott wrote, "What about the female athletes who don't generate a dime? Title IX."
--------
University of Tennessee women's basketball games have huge crowds of ticket-paying fans.
in Thompson-Boling Arena (capacity more than 20,000). For Lady Vols away games that I see via TV it appears that their opponents also draw big crowds.

I've attended U. of Oregon women's games that had similar crowds although Ducks arena is not as big as UT. And I have seen , on TV, university women's gymnastics and softball games with packed stands.

So I think some female athletes generate a lot of dollars -- while conceding that collegiate football (men only) is the biggest money maker.
James Fields
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Knoxville and Seattle

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby jazzcyclist » Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:16 pm

James Fields wrote:JumboElliott wrote, "What about the female athletes who don't generate a dime? Title IX."
--------
University of Tennessee women's basketball games have huge crowds of ticket-paying fans.
in Thompson-Boling Arena (capacity more than 20,000). For Lady Vols away games that I see via TV it appears that their opponents also draw big crowds.

I've attended U. of Oregon women's games that had similar crowds although Ducks arena is not as big as UT. And I have seen , on TV, university women's gymnastics and softball games with packed stands.

So I think some female athletes generate a lot of dollars -- while conceding that collegiate football (men only) is the biggest money maker.

Believe it or not, both Tennessee and Connecticut women's basketball lose money according the latest available figures. In 2012, the Tennessee women had an operating budget of $6,172,601 and $4,094,317 in revenues. For Connecticut, those figures were $6,037,411 and $4,704,571 respectively. The bottom line is that it's all about the TV contracts.

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/dataFiles/E ... 1-2012.zip
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10857
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: NCAA Lawsuit

Postby Marlow » Sat Aug 24, 2013 4:32 pm

Talk about opening Pandora's box (allowing NCAA players a slice of the pie)!
You think we've seen big scandals with boosters and coaches illegally recruiting? Wait'll they get the green light to 'revenue-share' with players and players-to-be. There'll be no use closing that box back up, because 'hope' will have flown out too.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21079
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests