Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

PAC-12 shakedown

Discussion in 'RayGator's Swamp Gas' started by 62gator, Aug 2, 2020.

  1. archigator_96

    archigator_96 All American

    337
    123
    173
    Apr 8, 2020
    Not completely sure but it sounds like the athletes can have one or the other, not both.

    They can have the scholarship, free room and board etc... and they already get the stipend or get paid and have to cover the cost of their own housing etc... and report the income to the IRS.

    At the end of the day... be careful what you wish for.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. 96Gatorcise

    96Gatorcise GC Hall of Fame

    10,195
    1,672
    1,743
    Aug 6, 2008
    Tampa
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. TrueGator

    TrueGator GC Hall of Fame

    2,674
    890
    388
    Nov 11, 2014
    If the programs lose money this year, would these clowns take 50% of the loss, too?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  4. Skink

    Skink GC Hall of Fame

    Boy did you ever miss the point
     
  5. steveGator52

    steveGator52 GC Legend

    802
    304
    308
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    Private schools don’t take students who use Bright Futures, Pell Grants, GI Bill, etc.? Lots of state and federal money is provided to college students in Florida, and I doubt most private universities turn down paying students.

    And if only 5% of athletic programs break even, then 95% require some money from the university, which comes from student fees, which comes from students. And you can be damn sure that some of those students receive state or federal money to help pay their tuition.

    So he is more right than you want to admit. Taxpayers subsidize college sports for those Universities that aren’t profitable.
     
  6. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    6,550
    679
    948
    Apr 16, 2007
    Therein lies the problem.

    The current system as it stands: in essence, the football players pay the costs of many of these programs. If you “professionalize” and give football players a cut of football revenues, athletic departments would hardly be able to fund other amateur athletics. Thus “athletic departments” would become “football departments”. In some places in the Deep South especially, football already runs the show, but this would literally mean football and nothing else.

    Some people are probably ok with that arrangement. I’m not one of them though. That’s not what college should be about. For whatever reason, actual minor league football has mostly failed, that doesn’t mean we should ruin college football by officially making it a professional minor league.

    I do think the money has gotten so big, maybe we should allow athletes to seek endorsements? That would be less disruptive than “revenue sharing”. At least it lets them monetize and unlock some of their value individually.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2020
    • Like Like x 4
  7. TrueGator

    TrueGator GC Hall of Fame

    2,674
    890
    388
    Nov 11, 2014
    I believe I have found some common ground with you, Bling. That heartens me.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. steveGator52

    steveGator52 GC Legend

    802
    304
    308
    May 3, 2016
    DC Metro area
    Can of worms. A big can of worms. A 55 gallon drum of worms. The rich will get richer, because it would allow those programs that pay to put it out in the open. No more booster issues, as boosters could now legally pay the kids through “endorsements”. How is it any different than the no-show summer jobs that were an issue in the past? The team with the deepest booster pockets would have an inside track for the talent.

    The signing day circus would get even more outrageous than it is now. Bidding wars for players where a prospect’s handler would shake the money tree.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    6,550
    679
    948
    Apr 16, 2007
    Yeah, but unfortunately the enforcement of all that “extra benefits” stuff is a joke at this stage. Some programs corruption is practically out in the open. Nothing is done about it.

    I view this as like the drug war, it’s a battle you absolutely can’t win, and the NCAA really doesn’t even put resources to stop the corruption (unlike the war on drugs which is a ludicrous waste of resources). If anything, the NCAA are silent partners at this stage.

    Might as well just put it all above board. Make endorsements legal per NCAA rules - let the athletes earn their money this way. Whatever they are worth off the field should be theirs, and the best thing is this costs athletic departments nothing. So amateur sports where revenue doesn’t exist could still be funded in the same way they are now. Maybe there can be reporting requirements, IRS would probably want to know if millions are changing hands.
     
  10. LLCoolJ94

    LLCoolJ94 GC Hall of Fame

    I'm not sure how the football players pay the cost of any of it.

    Nevertheless, I agree with the core of what you are saying in the rest, except for one caveat. Let's think through this endorsement deal a bit. Also, let's be honest about it. Who do you think is going to "endorse" the majority of these athletes? Local businesses who think they're going to see revenue increases? I mean, that is the point of seeking an endorsement. I think that's a rather dubious proposition. I think a more likely scenario is we're going to see bagmen more out in the open. Well, we may not see the actual bagmen--I suspect they will launder the money through some legit business--but we will see the actual money out in the open. I think the endorsements will become part of the recruiting game. Prospects will consider heavily which schools has the largest "endorsements" lined up. The significant delineation between this scenario and a professional minor league is that the taxpayers are not subsidizing the costs.

    What is more, consider the locker room. Jealously and envy are difficult to quell in mature men let alone young men in a hyper-competitive sport. With the money out in the open, how long until one player feels that he is not compensated in accordance with his own perceived value to the team. Does he "re-negotiate" with the booster/bagman? Does he hold his team hostage? How will his coaches and teammates respond? How would you respond if you were on the team? Or if you were a coach? Would you trust a guy like that? Or, what would you do if you felt as though someone was unworthy of the endorsement which he was receiving?

    Something that is left out of this conversation--at least as far as UF goes--is the F Club. The F Club does all it can to ensure the success of its former athletes once sports are done. Personally, I can speak for one guy who was not a pro player. Once he finished at UF, he was rewarded with a business opportunity via the F Club. Currently, he owns a very successful construction company. Hell, I'd love to switch positions!

    Still, I agree that the money has grown too large for college athletics. I would rather see some of this money leave the conversation. I think many of us can agree that we want kids who want to be Gators, who appreciate the Gators Standard. I think most, if not all, of the boosters want to support these guys as much as possible with education, tutors, training, healthcare, etc. I think we all want the kids to see UF as an opportunity to create the best versions of themselves and a community that will support them all the way.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  11. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    6,550
    679
    948
    Apr 16, 2007
    Obviously football players aren't LITERALLY paying for it, not directly. I meant in a roundabout way. If we figure at the big time programs football drives the show, and elite athletes have "value" far more than that of a scholarship (which clearly guys like Tim Tebow, and likely at least a handful of athletes at every big time program bring in millions worth of value), they are "contributing" by adding millions of value, but taking out much less compensation in the form of scholarships. Some of those rookie contracts in the NFL are huge, those big time guys are basically worth that their final college years as well, let's not kid ourselves. That is their market value (and even the NFL is a supressed market value because of the salary cap). As amateurs they just aren't allowed to explore that market value at all. Obviously lesser players on the team don't have much of any market value, so indeed there would be a huge disparity on teams, and that is another issue - which is an excellent point.

    If we get into these "revenue sharing" ideas, the math changes completely. Instead of that money going to other non-revenue sports, it gets pulled out and put towards football compensation. I'm not opposed to increasing stipends, I've always said it's ridiculous some kids are dirt poor and aren't even allowed to be paid "going around" money - whereas the coaches are all multi millionares. But not all programs can really even afford that. UF surely can, but if they get farther into "revenue sharing" and football wants to pull out 10 or 20 million to compensate the team a "market value" or something close to it, then instead of a program like UF operating with a $5 million surplus which goes back to the University, UAA starts operating in the red. So then other sports end up having to get cut just to get back to break-even. As I suggested eventually the $$$ demands get so great you end up with a "football department" rather than an athletic department. Unlike football, the other sports don't really have a financial ROI and football athletes would then have all the leverage to demand increasing compensation, whereas non revenue athletes would have no leverage at all to stand up to it.
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2020
  12. 31g8r

    31g8r Senior

    213
    70
    333
    Oct 20, 2013
    I think the one piece of the puzzle missing is this. I’m not aware of fans making contributions beyond ticket and licensed product purchases to professional sports organizations. I consider these purchases separate from a contribution.

    How much of the UAA’s operating budget comes from outright donations/contributions from loyal boosters? All athletic depts regardless of size have similar boosters. I think a large amount of these historic contributions disappear if the traditional college sports model goes semi-pro.

    I also posit this pro football is more like a Guild for craftsman. They require an apprentice period to acquire the necessary skills and development before being invited to join the league. Right or wrong the league knows immediately after HS there are no players ready for the rigors of the league either physically, mentally, or emotionally.

    I am strictly limiting the ability to compete in a professional environment to football. This particular sport demands physical development to function 1 on 1 compared to 1 vs 1 see baseball, basketball, tennis, golf, etc. Much like a HS senior designing battle bots isnt ready to skip college to design aircraft for Lockheed.

    Development/experience takes time regardless of our desire to ‘speed’ up the clock to synchronize them with immediate wants.

    Thoughts?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. filamg8torfan

    filamg8torfan GC Legend

    889
    286
    243
    Mar 17, 2019
    I maybe off on this, but I think title IX need to be considered in all of these. So, schools will have to deal with another lawsuit because others will feel treated unfairly again. Which is why title IX was started in the first place. You can't just pay football players without doing the same thing to other student-athletes playing in different sports. It doesn't matter if the sports they play don't generate money for the school.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  14. Skink

    Skink GC Hall of Fame

    You get a green check mark for the 1st paragraph and double bacon for the 2nd and 3rd.
     
  15. Skink

    Skink GC Hall of Fame

    I don’t think you want huge differences in compensation between players. Lots more potential for locker room chemistry issues - who needs that?
     
  16. Skink

    Skink GC Hall of Fame

    You make a lot of sense here - but I still think the bullshit to benefit ratio has the potential to soar way past 1.0.

    The obvious best solution is the f*cking NCAA simply enforcing the rules already in place. It’s unfortunate that we have to seek alternatives to a system that is sound in principle, but breaking the rules is allowed through negligence (or worse).
     
    • Agree Agree x 1