California just voted in favor of killing off the PAC-12

[trojanfan12]

If you can’t define what a booster is, and you can’t understand how a business could steer a recruit to a school that would benefit them, and if you don’t understand why it makes a difference that a player couldn’t get an endorsement after they left school, then maybe you don’t belong in the convo.

Would it be ok for Phil Knight to pay $10k for the autographed pictures of any 5 star players who sign with Oregon? What about if all the members of the Nike board agreed to too? Would it be ok for Nike to sign them to an endorsement deal if they go to Oregon, or any other Nike school for that matter? How would that be different? Remember, the law does not allow for a player to endorse a product that competes with the schools sponsor, so they would have to go to a Nike school if they sign a deal with Nike.

If you can't define what a booster is, then I guess you really don't belong in the convo. So just feel free to continue running around like Chicken Little yelling about how the sky is falling.

As for Nike and other apparel companies that are providing equipment for the schools, it seems like common sense that they wouldn't be able to participate.

Additionally, the point behind them getting endorsements in college and putting all or part in a trust is so that they would already have the money when they leave school. Not wait until after they leave to start earning it.

As @socaljim242 pointed out, the scholarship was a great deal back in the day. But now, college football is a billion dollar business and everyone is getting rich except the people doing most of the work.

 

[HuskerOC]

If you can't define what a booster is, then I guess you really don't belong in the convo. So just feel free to continue running around like Chicken Little yelling about how the sky is falling.

As for Nike and other apparel companies that are providing equipment for the schools, it seems like common sense that they wouldn't be able to participate.

Additionally, the point behind them getting endorsements in college and putting all or part in a trust is so that they would already have the money when they leave school. Not wait until after they leave to start earning it.

As @socaljim242 pointed out, the scholarship was a great deal back in the day. But now, college football is a billion dollar business and everyone is getting rich except the people doing most of the work.

Nowhere near that easy.

I'd love for college men athletes in football and basketball to get sponsorships and money in their pockets, but we are talking about the 1% of the 1%. What about the other guys on the team? The ugly linemen and Linebackers that do all the real dirty work? Maybe an All-American CB or LB or DT or DE gets his day, but it is all offense and all QB, RB, and WR that would get that cash, right?

And then, what about dirty old Title IX? You know, the rule EVERY single NCAA member runs under upon the written agreement they agree to play as continuing to be a member of the NCAA.

You don't think equal pay rights for all genders, much less all players would come about? I mean shit, you live in Cali-fucking-fornia. The state of ALL equal rights, right?

NFL players in the '70s and early '80s never had it as good as college athletes today.

California can't fall into the ocean fast enough.

 

[trojanfan12]

Nowhere near that easy.

I'd love for college men athletes in football and basketball to get sponsorships and money in their pockets, but we are talking about the 1% of the 1%. What about the other guys on the team? The ugly linemen and Linebackers that do all the real dirty work? Maybe an All-American CB or LB or DT or DE gets his day, but it is all offense and all QB, RB, and WR that would get that cash, right?

And then, what about dirty old Title IX? You know, the rule EVERY single NCAA member runs under upon the written agreement they agree to play as continuing to be a member of the NCAA.

You don't think equal pay rights for all genders, much less all players would come about? I mean shit, you live in Cali-fucking-fornia. The state of ALL equal rights, right?

NFL players in the '70s and early '80s never had it as good as college athletes today.

California can't fall into the ocean fast enough.

Never said it would be easy. That's why I am actually against this law. There is no way in hell that the idiots in the California legislature have thought this through beyond "gee, wouldn't it be cool of us to make a law so these kids can make money too" .

As for the 1%. That's how it is in life. For those who get to the NFL, the qb's, wr's, etc. make more than the linemen. Usually, significantly more.

The title IX issue has already been answered. The money wouldn't be coming from the school and all athletes would be allowed to do this, regardless of gender or sport.

I agree re: California, but can we wait until I get the hell out first?

 

[cclxxxvdicere]

If you can't define what a booster is, then I guess you really don't belong in the convo. So just feel free to continue running around like Chicken Little yelling about how the sky is falling.

As for Nike and other apparel companies that are providing equipment for the schools, it seems like common sense that they wouldn't be able to participate.

Additionally, the point behind them getting endorsements in college and putting all or part in a trust is so that they would already have the money when they leave school. Not wait until after they leave to start earning it.

As @socaljim242 pointed out, the scholarship was a great deal back in the day. But now, college football is a billion dollar business and everyone is getting rich except the people doing most of the work.

No, you just can’t define a booster so you could prevent them from paying the players. You think that Nick Saban and an army of lawyers can’t find a loophole to get around whatever definition you can come up with? Sucker.

So the major sporting goods companies will be prohibited from making deals with the players? How does that make any sense at all? Where’s the endorsement money coming from? Is any company associated with a booster prohibited too? How do you determine which companies are ok and which ones aren’t?

If the players can’t get endorsements after they leave school, it’s not really them that makes them marketable, it’s the school. They’re just another guy wearing the number on the jersey.

 

[WhiteMamba]

California is rad.

 

[trojanfan12]

No, you just can’t define a booster so you could prevent them from paying the players. You think that Nick Saban and an army of lawyers can’t find a loophole to get around whatever definition you can come up with? Sucker.

So the major sporting goods companies will be prohibited from making deals with the players? How does that make any sense at all? Where’s the endorsement money coming from? Is any company associated with a booster prohibited too? How do you determine which companies are ok and which ones aren’t?

If the players can’t get endorsements after they leave school, it’s not really them that makes them marketable, it’s the school. They’re just another guy wearing the number on the jersey.

Lol. Your arguments make no sense. In the NFL, players get endorsements because they are NFL players. So, thd NFL is why they get endorsements. And they get those while they are also making millions from the team they play for.

Also, lol @how do you decide which companies are ok? I literally stated how that's determined in the post you quoted.

 

[HuskerOC]

Never said it would be easy. That's why I am actually against this law. There is no way in hell that the idiots in the California legislature have thought this through beyond "gee, wouldn't it be cool of us to make a law so these kids can make money too" .

As for the 1%. That's how it is in life. For those who get to the NFL, the qb's, wr's, etc. make more than the linemen. Usually, significantly more.

The title IX issue has already been answered. The money wouldn't be coming from the school and all athletes would be allowed to do this, regardless of gender or sport.

I agree re: California, but can we wait until I get the hell out first?

Ha. Solid response.

QB's, WR's, and RB's DON'T make ridiculous amounts of money more than OL and DL and top end DBs and LBs in the NFL. There are a number of OL and DTs and DEs that make QB money in the NFL.

Which is OK, because the players Joe Fan loves gets even more and the 'grunt' still gets a solid living.

College? The 'grunt' gets zero, and Joe Fan pays for the QB jersey that is likely not even the best player on the team. $10 Million vs $25 Million is acceptable for most in the NFL. $50K vs $0 makes zero sense in college. Even in California.

As for boosters vs. legit businessmen and sponsorships? I mean, seriously? There are already 500 to 600 car dealerships in the Southeast with ears perked as to how they can shovel money OVER the table and have commercials with players.

 

[AlaskaGuy]

California is rad.

It's the radest for sure.

Recycled water from sewers coming to California taps

Typhus Epidemic Worsens in Los Angeles

Rolling outages begin in Glendale

San Francisco has a 'Poop Patrol' to deal with its feces problem, and workers make more than $184,000 a year in salary and benefits

California to give healthcare to illegal immigrants

LA made $1.3B in illegal immigrant welfare payouts in just 2 years

 

[trojanfan12]

California is rad.

It used to be. I really want out. But as long as the grandsons are here, the wife won't let us leave. I've alreafy got 3 options to move to.

I need to win the lottery. Then I can take the daughter and grandsons with us.

 

[trojanfan12]

Ha. Solid response.

QB's, WR's, and RB's DON'T make ridiculous amounts of money more than OL and DL and top end DBs and LBs in the NFL. There are a number of OL and DTs and DEs that make QB money in the NFL.

Which is OK, because the players Joe Fan loves gets even more and the 'grunt' still gets a solid living.

College? The 'grunt' gets zero, and Joe Fan pays for the QB jersey that is likely not even the best player on the team. $10 Million vs $25 Million is acceptable for most in the NFL. $50K vs $0 makes zero sense in college. Even in California.

As for boosters vs. legit businessmen and sponsorships? I mean, seriously? There are already 500 to 600 car dealerships in the Southeast with ears perked as to how they can shovel money OVER the table and have commercials with players.

Yeah a lot of what you say makes sense. Like I said, I know it wouldn't be easy and there may not be a way to do it that doesn't open a pandora's box of other issues.

But I think that it's at least worth someone a whole lot smarter than me giving it a serious look rather than just dismissing it out of hand.

 

[cclxxxvdicere]

Lol. Your arguments make no sense. In the NFL, players get endorsements because they are NFL players. So, thd NFL is why they get endorsements. And they get those while they are also making millions from the team they play for.

Also, lol @how do you decide which companies are ok? I literally stated how that's determined in the post you quoted.

Peyton Manning still makes money from endorsements years after he left the NFL, he gets them because of who he is, not because of who he plays for.

No, you literally didn’t say how to determine which companies are allowed to endorse players. If Apple gives endorsements to players going to Auburn, is the fact that an Auburn alum is CEO a problem?

 

[HuskerOC]

Yeah a lot of what you say makes sense. Like I said, I know it wouldn't be easy and there may not be a way to do it that doesn't open a pandora's box of other issues.

But I think that it's at least worth someone a whole lot smarter than me giving it a serious look rather than just dismissing it out of hand.

Problem is the masses aren't thinking about it rationally, and just getting fed triggering data and information.

Like I initially stated, I'd love to pay the guys that pack 100K seat stadiums and all that. Problem is, are the supposed stars the only ones that get paid?

These are 17-24 year old kids. KIDS. They are already hyped and provided for enough. I ate Ramen noodles, Titos pizza, and plain can veggies in college so I could drink beer and have fun on the weekend while working a shit job. No, I don't wish that on the next Gen, but damn, do they really need better housing, cars, and spending money than me now while they are in college?

The college football players today aren't struggling. Far from it. In Lincoln, NE they get over $5K in a stipend so they can "live" upon. A mere $600 plus a month to live on when Room, Board, Tuition, Books, and essentially ever other living expense is taken care of. And yes, like any other P5 program, dudes are paid under the table.

And that isn't enough?

 

[ralphiewvu]

My link is all about the free television stations (over the air) that don't require a carrier to be paid in order to watch...which runs counter to what you had stated.

An I’m telling you it’s wrong. You can’t just buy a television and plug it in and instantly there’s ABC or FOX.

But that’s not the point. The point is they aren’t going to suddenly stop showing college football in California if this law indeed goes through and the schools follow through. So I have a hard time believing corporate sponsorship will decrease to the point that anyone will feel it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Peyton Manning still makes money from endorsements years after he left the NFL, he gets them because of who he is, not because of who he plays for.

No, you literally didn’t say how to determine which companies are allowed to endorse players. If Apple gives endorsements to players going to Auburn, is the fact that an Auburn alum is CEO a problem?

He gets them for who he is because of what he accomplished in the NFL. No NFL, no Peyton Manning endorsements. Nice try though.

Yes, that would be a problem. As I said in a previous post. It might be that there just isn't a way to do it that doesn't open up a whole other set of issues.

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be given a very serious look by folks a lot smarter than me.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

Looks like as of today none of the Cali schools will be doing a home & home with any of the Iowa schools.

California adds Iowa to 'travel ban' over refusal to fund gender transitions

i like it…vote w/ your state dollars i say.


what a concept.

 

[cclxxxvdicere]

He gets them for who he is because of what he accomplished in the NFL. No NFL, no Peyton Manning endorsements. Nice try though.

Yes, that would be a problem. As I said in a previous post. It might be that there just isn't a way to do it that doesn't open up a whole other set of issues.

But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be given a very serious look by folks a lot smarter than me.

And the ex-college player would be getting paid for what he accomplished in college too, no college, no endorsements. Nice try though.

If you say you’re against this law, and you don’t think they’ve thought this thing through, I’m not sure why you’re fighting tooth and nail against perfectly reasonable objections to it. What exactly are your problems with it?

 

[trojanfan12]

Problem is the masses aren't thinking about it rationally, and just getting fed triggering data and information.

Like I initially stated, I'd love to pay the guys that pack 100K seat stadiums and all that. Problem is, are the supposed stars the only ones that get paid?

These are 17-24 year old kids. KIDS. They are already hyped and provided for enough. I ate Ramen noodles, Titos pizza, and plain can veggies in college so I could drink beer and have fun on the weekend while working a shit job. No, I don't wish that on the next Gen, but damn, do they really need better housing, cars, and spending money than me now while they are in college?

The college football players today aren't struggling. Far from it. In Lincoln, NE they get over $5K in a stipend so they can "live" upon. A mere $600 plus a month to live on when Room, Board, Tuition, Books, and essentially ever other living expense is taken care of. And yes, like any other P5 program, dudes are paid under the table.

And that isn't enough?

I haven't said they aren't taken care of. But what they get is a pittance compared to the money the school makes off of their efforts. They are the ones putting their health on the line. Meanwhile others make millions off of these kids talents.

And why shouldn't they have it better than you if they can do it? Was every student at your college eating Ramen so they could party on the weekends? Or were there kids from wealthy families that didn't have to go through that?

Besides, if they didn't have it better, then us old dudes couldn't bitch about how easy kids have it today. Lol

 

[Deep Creek]

I haven't said they aren't taken care of. But what they get is a pittance compared to the money the school makes off of their efforts. They are the ones putting their health on the line. Meanwhile others make millions off of these kids talents.

And why shouldn't they have it better than you if they can do it? Was every student at your college eating Ramen so they could party on the weekends? Or were there kids from wealthy families that didn't have to go through that?

Besides, if they didn't have it better, then us old dudes couldn't bitch about how easy kids have it today. Lol

This is the heart of the issue IMO.

 

[HuskerOC]

I haven't said they aren't taken care of. But what they get is a pittance compared to the money the school makes off of their efforts. They are the ones putting their health on the line. Meanwhile others make millions off of these kids talents.

And why shouldn't they have it better than you if they can do it? Was every student at your college eating Ramen so they could party on the weekends? Or were there kids from wealthy families that didn't have to go through that?

Besides, if they didn't have it better, then us old dudes couldn't bitch about how easy kids have it today. Lol

Even with the money being paid into college sports, there are roughly 20 Athletic Departments in college athletics that are actually making a 'profit'.

Trust me. I'm fine with cutting every sport other than Football, Men's Basketball. Wrestling, Baseball, and Women's Volleyball. The rest can fend for themselves in club leagues.

 

[trojanfan12]

And the ex-college player would be getting paid for what he accomplished in college too, no college, no endorsements. Nice try though.

If you say you’re against this law, and you don’t think they’ve thought this thing through, I’m not sure why you’re fighting tooth and nail against perfectly reasonable objections to it. What exactly are your problems with it?

No he wouldn't. He got endorsements because of the NFL, not because of college. If he left Tennessee and chose not to play in the NFL, no one is giving him endorsements. So, I can't even give you a nice try for that one.

I haven't seen much in the way of perfectly reasonable objections. I just see a lot of "omg, this bad thing or that bad thing might happen with no more serious thought than the California legislature gave this law.

I'm not opposed to players being allowed to make money. I just don't trust that this law is the way to do it.

Also, I'm willing to accept that after it's been given a serious look, it may be determined that it's just not feasible.

You, on the other hand, aren't willing to accept that there may be a good way to do it.