California at it Again

[metalman82]

Funny because I thought that certain politicians were for equal pay amongst all facets of athletics. This would segregate programs using an economic profile.

 

[Toasted712]

I have no problem with this as long as we either get rid of scholarships or consider that part of their 50%. Also, this should be applied to all college athletic sports and let the ones that do not make any $$ just go away. There is no logical argument to be made to treat football differently from any other sport. All college athletes should be treated the same if we are making free market arguments.

This is for all college sports.

The proposal states some schools there will be money for baseball, hockey, gymnastics, womans Bball, volleyball, and potentially a few others.

 

[Toasted712]

I have no problem with this as long as we either get rid of scholarships or consider that part of their 50%. Also, this should be applied to all college athletic sports and let the ones that do not make any $$ just go away. There is no logical argument to be made to treat football differently from any other sport. All college athletes should be treated the same if we are making free market arguments.

Most schools $25k won't even cover tuition. It won't cover OOS tuition at Clemson and that's fairly affordable compared to like Baylor and other private schools.

 

[Toasted712]

Better yet, why not have every company based in CA split the revenue/profit at 50% across everyone "employed" there during a full year? Not much difference if folks want to truly commit to this line of thinking.

Sports don't work like your typical company. Never have, never will. This seems like a decent way to keep it like everyone gets a scholarship.

 

[Trading Tiger]

They want to “make the athletes whole”….that’s phrasing used when someone has been afflicted. I didn’t realize college athletes were such victims.

I had to stop reading when I got to the line, make the athletes whole, give me a fvckin break!

 

[CUTiger1977]

There's a reason the state of California wants players to be paid.

CALIFORNIA’S JOCK TAX

Any playing coming into the state making money owes them taxes.

Good luck to CA schools wanting teams to play a home and home with them.

Watch players opt out of CA bowls now because they don't want to pay the taxes for going there.

That was a good read. Thanks.

 

[Willence]

If enough people wanted to watch me do my electrical engineering lab, yes I would want a piece of that pie too. We have teenagers making millions playing video games professionally.

When you have an elite set of skills, you should be compensated specifically as it relates to sports and entertainment.

Should Taylor Swift or the Jonas Brothers not have been compensated BEFORE they were 18 because they weren't adults? Should we not pay child actors? Should their parents start charging them rent because they put a roof over their head? This is entertainment. The entertainment industry doesn't work like other industries. Your argument honestly sucks. I get how playing for school pride and an education appeals to the older crowd.

Said another way, equate it to pro sports, because it is as far as money involved, call a scholarship and amenities league minimum. Add to it now the money the school makes on their TV deal split equally among the 85 to be league minimum. Seems reasonable.

That's a really flawed argument. Those individuals did not willingly enter into a contract to sing in exchange for an education. No one was forcing them to do that. They had all the choices in the world that they could make just as these young men do. When they decide to enter into an agreement to accept a scholarship to college in exchange or their football talents they are making a deal. How much money is involved at that point is irrelevant. It's assigned agreement that they enter into willingly. That should be the end of it but it isn't because we're stupid.

 

[PAWrocka]

One thing that was mentioned in the ESPN article thing morning about this, is that the proposed legislation would require no impact to Title 9 (cant cut women's sports) and would allow for reallocation of monies to non-revenue sports. ..... Ok .... not sure how you do that, but ok.

and the other kicker is that the legislation would forbid schools from classing athletes as employees. My guess is that they would do that so that the schools wouldnt be able to signed employment contracts and therefore institute "Non-compete clauses" thus limiting or eliminating transfers

 

[bizlat]

If enough people wanted to watch me do my electrical engineering lab, yes I would want a piece of that pie too. We have teenagers making millions playing video games professionally.

When you have an elite set of skills, you should be compensated specifically as it relates to sports and entertainment.

Should Taylor Swift or the Jonas Brothers not have been compensated BEFORE they were 18 because they weren't adults? Should we not pay child actors? Should their parents start charging them rent because they put a roof over their head? This is entertainment. The entertainment industry doesn't work like other industries. Your argument honestly sucks. I get how playing for school pride and an education appeals to the older crowd.

Said another way, equate it to pro sports, because it is as far as money involved, call a scholarship and amenities league minimum. Add to it now the money the school makes on their TV deal split equally among the 85 to be league minimum. Seems reasonable.

You hear this argument often and it misses the point. Sport is not art. The drama is not manufactured like the movies. The entertainment comes from the competition. It's not the WWE. It could be & people would still watch, but not nearly as many.

Just going by the article, which could be completely wrong, USC could pay each player $800k. How is anyone in the ACC going to compete w/ that? That's $60 mill per graduating class give or take. That's nuts.

I don't understand why the government is even getting involved. People are just like yeah politicians are taking care of it, duh? why? I'm guessing the vast majority of these sports programs don't receive any tax dollars. Ramogi could just get all the good players together & let them start their own league instead of making another law. Then they could finally be 'completely whole', and have all the profits for themselves.

And another thing while I'm rambling on, why do these politicians never go after the NFL? I mean isn't their policy, which is mostly to blame for all this, some sort of age discrimination?

 

[CUT93]

I’d love to hear why scholarships should be taken away or part of the 50%

I would love to hear why they shouldn't be if they are going to be considered employees of a business.

 

[CUT93]

lol you’re making a communist/ socialist argument. capitalism rewards those who earn it.

Which part are you referring to that you think is communist/socialist?

 

[Toasted712]

That's a really flawed argument. Those individuals did not willingly enter into a contract to sing in exchange for an education. No one was forcing them to do that. They had all the choices in the world that they could make just as these young men do. When they decide to enter into an agreement to accept a scholarship to college in exchange or their football talents they are making a deal. How much money is involved at that point is irrelevant. It's assigned agreement that they enter into willingly. That should be the end of it but it isn't because we're stupid.

But like 60 years ago my grandfather painted fences with the Packers starting OL because Bart Starr was pretty much the only player that was paid enough to have a livable wage.

Can times not change man? Can we not up "league minimum" for a sport that grosses.... checks gooogle.... D1 schools make an average of $32 mill per school per Google. There's 128 schools. That's 4 billion dollars that has majority free labor for the price of a $200k degree, give or take. I don't know what the number is. Maybe 50% is too high. The previous mentioned number means roughly another 200k a year for football players (article states this as well) of which they'd only get to keep $25k.

It's a subject that nobody is going to change anyone's mind on. Would you work for your company for free if they paid for your, and yours alone, food and housing just for the good of your company? That's kinda how I look at it.

 

[Toasted712]

I would love to hear why they shouldn't be if they are going to be considered employees of a business.

It's part of the package.

 

[Shevlin77]

Better yet, why not have every company based in CA split the revenue/profit at 50% across everyone "employed" there during a full year? Not much difference if folks want to truly commit to this line of thinking.

Because those companies are not receiving funds from the state. But, I do agree the line of thinking is the same.

 

[treetiger]

If you envision your college sports team taking the next leap into professional sports status, California is your kind of state. If this law is passed and then begins to permeate through the rest of the country (like NIL did), you can see how quickly college sports become professional sports with collective bargaining and all the fun associated with your favorite professional team. To me, this would be the final nail that will force all schools to determine whether they want to play in the professional pool, or cut the top off all of our upper decks and revert back to the original model of non-professional teams playing schools that opt out.

Perhaps Lex Luther's plan for California (in the very old '78 Superman movie) wasn't such a bad idea.........

California could lead another charge in college athlete pay with its latest proposed bill
California sparked the birth of NIL money for athletes; now the state could take it a step further

Dan Wetzel, January 19, 2023

In 2019, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the Fair Pay To Play Act, which prohibited the NCAA from punishing a student-athlete who profited off their name, image and likeness (NIL). With state law trumping NCAA rules, it meant any college athlete from a California school could make some money while playing.

Lawmakers from across the political spectrum in states all over the country quickly followed suit and passed their own bills. Courts upheld the legislation and NIL is now a major, if evolving, part of college athletics.

“California has been very effective at putting forth trailblazing legislation,” state Assembly member Chris Holden said. “It makes sense and then catches on around the country.”

Well, California is back, this time with Holden, who serves Pasadena and spoke Thursday in front of the famed Rose Bowl, sponsoring a law that promises an even bolder change to how college sports operates.

The College Athlete Protection Act will begin working its way through committees with optimism among backers that it can find its way to Newsom’s desk this fall and be signed. (A similar bill failed last year).

CAPA takes a direct shot at the NCAA’s long-standing amateurism model by requiring schools to share profits from specific programs with its athletes, particularly those who graduate.

The bill requires schools to share up to 50% of revenue with athletes who compete in programs that bring in twice as much in revenue as they spend on athletic scholarships.

At many places this would include only football and men’s basketball, although women’s basketball, gymnastics, ice hockey, volleyball and other sports can reach that threshold at certain schools.

Current student-athletes' pay would be capped at $25,000 per year while they're in school, but colleges would be required to set aside an equally divided 50% of revenue annually to be paid out upon completion of a degree within six years. At major football programs, such as USC, that could equal about $200,000 a year per player — or $800,000 for a four-year career, according to some estimates.

Part of what doomed the bill last year were concerns that by paying football and basketball players, athletic departments would lack the resources to continue to fund scholarships or even entire teams in non-profitable sports. This time, to prevent such cuts, there is a second funding option.

A school that sees an increase in revenue — even a small amount — can allocate 50% of the so-called “new money” to pay the athletes in those sports. This would likely result in far less money for athletes, if any at all, but it's still considered progress

It is also the way, proponents argue, that existing budgets aren’t strained to the point of pulling back opportunities for others. USC and UCLA, for example, are about to enter the Big Ten Conference where millions in new money is awaiting. That increase in revenue could save those schools money under the new bill.

“Even though it won't make the athletes whole, it will represent progress for those athletes,” said Ramogi Huma, a former UCLA football player and now president of the National Collegiate Players Association.

The bill also calls for a three-year ban for any athletic director who cuts teams or scholarships under these circumstances.

There are additional provisions and CAPA could be beefed up or stripped down as it goes through the legislative process.

If it were to pass, it will likely be duplicated by other states, if only out of competitiveness. After the NIL bill passed in 2019, there was a fear that California schools would enjoy a significant recruiting advantage — why not go play where you can earn more than just a scholarship?

States began to match or even write more forgiving laws in an effort to outdo not just California, but states with rival programs. Others have sat it out and watched as the NCAA has been essentially powerless to stop all kinds of payments to players and recruits. Public sentiment has quickly swung against the NCAA and amateurism.

CAPA may be slightly less pronounced of an advantage. NIL opportunities anywhere can offset the graduation payment, which in and of itself is a delayed payout that may not hold the recruiting sway of an immediate deal.

That said, it is a full-throttle attack on the concept of amateurism, which the NCAA has clung to long after other international sports organizations, most notably the Olympics, have given up. This would feature schools making direct payments to players — an addition to scholarships, academic awards and Pell Grants that are already allowed.

Back in 2019, many in college sports ignored the actions of the California Assembly, only to see its impact quickly sweep over football and basketball. No one should make the same mistake this time.

Precisely how this will play out isn’t known, but if it passes as some expect it, college sports will be forever altered, perhaps significantly.

"Perhaps Lex Luther's plan for California (in the very old '78 Superman movie) wasn't such a bad idea........."

I wonder if you could amass hundreds of thousands of people with large crowbars along the San Andreas Fault and just pry that sucker loose and let it drift away toward China? I'm sure China would embrace them with open arms, well maybe with the exception of their feeling regarding the sexes? 😆

 

[Toasted712]

You hear this argument often and it misses the point. Sport is not art. The drama is not manufactured like the movies. The entertainment comes from the competition. It's not the WWE. It could be & people would still watch, but not nearly as many.

Just going by the article, which could be completely wrong, USC could pay each player $800k. How is anyone in the ACC going to compete w/ that? That's $60 mill per graduating class give or take. That's nuts.

I don't understand why the government is even getting involved. People are just like yeah politicians are taking care of it, duh? why? I'm guessing the vast majority of these sports programs don't receive any tax dollars. Ramogi could just get all the good players together & let them start their own league instead of making another law. Then they could finally be 'completely whole', and have all the profits for themselves.

And another thing while I'm rambling on, why do these politicians never go after the NFL? I mean isn't their policy, which is mostly to blame for all this, some sort of age discrimination?

Eh ok. Sports are still a form of entertainment.

Those numbers are over 4 years. That's $15 mill a year and $200k per athlete per year. Still seems like a bargain given the org makes 30+ mill a year on just your TV deal, tickets, parking, and concessions. This wouldn't include donations, IPTAY, licensing/merchandise, etc.

The NFL's policy is dumb, but there is some reasonable semblance of safety behind you shouldn't have 18 year olds going against grown men in a full contact sport. There are a handful that didn't need to go to college though. The NFL either needs to pay power 5 schools for being a minor league system for them or abolish the age limit/make it 18 so you can at least make an "adult" decision. You can't take guys heads off nearly as easily anymore.

 

[Shevlin77]

So what happens to the schools when they lose half of the revenue that goes back into supporting the program? coaches pay definitely comes down. Likely have to get rid of some staff. NIL and recruiting budgets will have to come down. What else?

 

[metalman82]

Sports don't work like your typical company. Never have, never will. This seems like a decent way to keep it like everyone gets a scholarship.

Sure sounds like that is what they are striving for. What they want is union employees who can collectively bargain and the unions can collect dues so that those dues are used to enrich the coffers of politicians. You think they actually care about the athletes? NO they don't, they only care about what is best for them. Politicians are the quintessential bank robber and unchecked will fleece the public to amass money which begets power.

 

[PAWrocka]

Eh ok. Sports are still a form of entertainment.

Those numbers are over 4 years. That's $15 mill a year and $200k per athlete per year. Still seems like a bargain given the org makes 30+ mill a year on just your TV deal, tickets, parking, and concessions. This wouldn't include donations, IPTAY, licensing/merchandise, etc.

The NFL's policy is dumb, but there is some reasonable semblance of safety behind you shouldn't have 18 year olds going against grown men in a full contact sport. There are a handful that didn't need to go to college though. The NFL either needs to pay power 5 schools for being a minor league system for them or abolish the age limit/make it 18 so you can at least make an "adult" decision. You can't take guys heads off nearly as easily anymore.

but ... What is a man?

Im not so sure anymore

 

[TigerPrice03]

I’d love to hear why scholarships should be taken away or part of the 50%

Because we are talking about compensation and that is part of their compensation.

 

[tgrharley]

You’re saying “California at it again” as if the Supreme Court hasn’t signaled that they are ready to blow NCAA amateurism out of the water. Justice Kavanaugh outright stated that if the case came before the court he believes college athletes should be treated as employees.

This isn’t a California thing. Pretty much everyone outside of college football traditionalists believe these guys should be getting paid. California is just ahead of the curve on this issue.

He said it that way because it's STARTING there again. Comprende?

 

[tigertommy1]

We are almost 2 full pages in and not one post that says “but the players don’t know how to pay taxes” or “someone will go to prison for not paying taxes on this”.

Back to the conversation: unionization is coming. And that might be the best thing in order to set limits, etc. (and I HATE unions and the thought of players forming a union)

 

[Howard's Jock]

I’d love to hear why scholarships should be taken away or part of the 50%

Why shouldn’t it?

 

[Howard's Jock]

We are almost 2 full pages in and not one post that says “but the players don’t know how to pay taxes” or “someone will go to prison for not paying taxes on this”.

Back to the conversation: unionization is coming. And that might be the best thing in order to set limits, etc. (and I HATE unions and the thought of players forming a union)

It’s usually the same poster that brings up the irs. Again and again.

 

[Willence]

But like 60 years ago my grandfather painted fences with the Packers starting OL because Bart Starr was pretty much the only player that was paid enough to have a livable wage.

Can times not change man? Can we not up "league minimum" for a sport that grosses.... checks gooogle.... D1 schools make an average of $32 mill per school per Google. There's 128 schools. That's 4 billion dollars that has majority free labor for the price of a $200k degree, give or take. I don't know what the number is. Maybe 50% is too high. The previous mentioned number means roughly another 200k a year for football players (article states this as well) of which they'd only get to keep $25k.

It's a subject that nobody is going to change anyone's mind on. Would you work for your company for free if they paid for your, and yours alone, food and housing just for the good of your company? That's kinda how I look at it.

This is because of how you view things. You're viewing them as professionals and they're kids in college. Kids who play sports in college. Equating these kids to pro football players, etc. is silly imo. Is college sports keeps going on the path that it is on now the money part will take care of itself because it will evaporate.

 

[Casa_del_Tigre]

Which part are you referring to that you think is communist/socialist?

Treating all athletes the same regardless of production. Aka labor theory of value

 

[Casa_del_Tigre]

Actually the Socialist angle would be that Football has to give $XXX to women's field hockey or something.

The Capitalist angle is that football keeps what it earns, and the other sports can either earn or fold.

Guy I was responding to was arguing bench field hockey players are paid the same as d1 qb.

 

[flotiger]

I have no problem with this as long as we either get rid of scholarships or consider that part of their 50%. Also, this should be applied to all college athletic sports and let the ones that do not make any $$ just go away. There is no logical argument to be made to treat football differently from any other sport. All college athletes should be treated the same if we are making free market arguments.

Lol. That's not a free market argument you're making. Almost the opposite.

 

[VTiger15]

By far the worst state in the country. I wish it and most of its liberal residents would drift off into the pacific.

 

[tigerjimp]

California is just trying to destroy CFB because the Cali/PAC12 schools have sucked and left out of the CFP. Even the idiots in California must understand what all of this is doing to CFB.

Then again, after watching the last episode of Netflix Bling Ring, maybe they are that stupid. Btw, the legal stupidity in the end was mind blowing.

 

[Toasted712]

This is because of how you view things. You're viewing them as professionals and they're kids in college. Kids who play sports in college. Equating these kids to pro football players, etc. is silly imo. Is college sports keeps going on the path that it is on now the money part will take care of itself because it will evaporate.

Are the minor leagues in baseball and hockey consider professionals? The G-league/Europe in basketball?

College football is the nfl’s minor leagues.

 

[Willence]

Are the minor leagues in baseball and hockey consider professionals? The G-league/Europe in basketball?

Yes, but in all sports you listed the collegiate level is considered the collegiate level. That the NFL does not have a developmental league or minor league is their problem. Ultimately, I wish that would happen so that we can move on from this and just have collegiate sports. I don't understand why you're conflating professional level leagues and businesses with college and collegiate athletics.

 

[TheValley91]

I would love to hear why they shouldn't be if they are going to be considered employees of a business.

There are benefits that employees receive. Scholarships can and will be one of them.

 

[appalachiatiger]

Maybe all the 5 stars should go play for the USFL or CFL and skip college.

Do colleges really need them?

Ohio State, Alabama, Georgia, Clemson will always be the top dogs regardless if 5 stars play in college.

 

[Say My Name]

Currently sitting at a Marriot villa in Newport Beach overlooking the ocean while a bunch of poors from Inman and Gaffney talk about how bad CA sucks.

Lol out loud

 

[CUT93]

There are benefits that employees receive. Scholarships can and will be one of them.

As long as they are included as benefits(which you readily admit they are) and are taxed as such, I am fine with that.

 

[CUT93]

Lol. That's not a free market argument you're making. Almost the opposite.

Which part is it that you think is the opposite of a free market argument?

 

[CUT93]

Treating all athletes the same regardless of production. Aka labor theory of value

That is the opposite of what I said. I said if one set of athletes is to be compensated based on their revenue production, they all should be compensated based on their revenue production. No where did I say they should all be treated equally regarless of their production. I have zero idea how you could get that idea from what I said.

 

[CUT93]

It's part of the package.

I don't have a problem if it is part of the package as long as it is included and taxed as a benefit.

 

[Dhuntjr21]

Here's a summary. California has massive infrastructure issues, massive water problems, massive power challenges, massive homeless crisis in their major cities, massive education problems, massive budget problems, massive health care issues, massive problems with people moving out of their state, challenges with representation of all viewpoints in their state and I could go on for about an hour. But instead, they're worried about revenue sport athletes getting paid. That's California these days, they are the state that specializes in rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Everyone needs a fair view of the entirely avoidable apocalypse.

What an absolute unit