forums

Florida is latest state with proposed legislation to pay student-athletes

KWConch said:
Colleges will NEVER pay players as long as Title IV is around but his bill will do more to unlevel the playing field than anything else.

Can you imagine what a school like Texas with endless amounts of money will be able to do with this bill??? Schools like Miami will be nothing more than a mid tier team.You think all the top kids are leaving now because of bags ? Wait till those bags go from sandwich size to large leaf size.
Click to expand...

Nobody knows the ramifications from this bill and the unintended consequences that will follow, but if I had to guess, I think you are right. I don't see how this is going to be good for Miami at all. I don't think this is going to help stop corruption in college athletics or level the plying field. It's going to make it worse. I only see the Bamas, OU, UT, OSU, and NDs of this world benefiting from this (and of course the players). Large schools, with large fanbases and big boosters will profit from this. The rest will be left behind, making it even worse than it is today.
 
Advertisement
HurricaneU said:
This isn't death to SEC or any other conference. Its death to an outdated, antiquated and at times corrupt, model that serves only bureaucrats at all levels while punishing some of the most uniquely talented and at the same time, economically vulnerable individuals.

Its not R or D. Both love the collective when they stand to benefit.

To paraphrase Jeff Bezos, there are times when government is required. There are times when non-profits serve the purpose best. And at others, and ideally, a marketplace is the optimal solution.

Its time for free market principles to evolve and replace for what is anachronistically called "amateur football".

Nothing could be more American than allowing individuals to capitalize on their skills and talents.
Click to expand...

Agreed, it's the right thing to do and long over due.
However, I'm not happy for the fact this will in all likely hood make UM even more irrelevant than than they already are. IMO UM will never be able to compete with the large schools, and huge alumni bases when this gets passed.
 
Good. These players should receive payment for use of their image and likeness.

This will not be the end of college football, and I actually think will level the playing field for schools like Miami.
 
Advertisement
SSCane said:
Agreed, it's the right thing to do and long over due.
However, I'm not happy for the fact this will in all likely hood make UM even more irrelevant than than they already are. IMO UM will never be able to compete with the large schools, and huge alumni bases when this gets passed.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I dont think anyone really knows how things will shake out.

Miami has a far more diverse and vibrant local economy than you will find in most other college towns.

There are so many variables at play its all just wild - but fun - speculation at this point.

Personally, I think a club system that is affiliated with the NFL makes a lot of sense as an initial model.
 
drewm3i said:
No it is not, it is the end of USC and Miami.

What is to stop Billy Bob's auto repair from paying an Alabama player $1,000,000 (funneled of course from boosters) for appearing on a billboard? You think Miami has businesses who care enough to do things like that?
Click to expand...

Everyone on this board complains about a kid's "heart being all Miami," but signing with an SEC team "as a business decision."

What happens when that SoFla player can no earn money using his name, image and likeness at both schools? What's the harm there?
 
Ash Joshi said:
The IRS won’t stop anything. In fact with this law most of the payments will be on the table and taxable. It’s the current structure of under the table payments that are very difficult to tax because it’s hard to prove who received what.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he meant that if a booster tried to move a large sum through a small local business as an advertising expense, the IRS would flag it and be able to trace it's source. Everything "under the table" will be brought into the light. You both meant the same thing
 
Advertisement
If you want to see every player's order of preference once this goes national, here it is.

960x0.jpg
 
I'm james Jackson brother said:
How they gone prove it?? them gits ain't gone tell on themselves. pay them 15hr legit and give them stacks in cash under the table. done deal.
Click to expand...

What's the point of doing it illegally tho? To avoid taxes? Not worth the risk, time and effort you would have to put in to launder that under the table money. As soon as you start making large purchases while reporting a small income the IRS would be on dat a$$
 
Some of you are misunderstanding what this does. This isn't about Billy Bob's Motors "paying" a high school recruit $200,000 to appear on a billboard, or Toothless Tom's Autobody Shop slipping bags into a 50K sports car for a five-star.

It's about a player being paid for his autograph. Or Nike paying a player to appear in an advertisement. Appearance fees. Etc. etc. It's going to be much more player-centric than school-centric (i.e., Trevor Lawrence is going to get paid more than Shaq Quarterman).

All things being equal, and this being a free market, I think players are going to look at this and say "I can go play in a major media market in Miami (or LA, etc.) and have more opportunity to market myself, or I can go to Tuscaloosa/Athens/Ann Arbor."

Miami has a metro area of about 6 million people. If you don't think that will matter if this legislation passes and is accepted as part of the NCAA, you need to pick up an economics text book.
 
Katzenboyer said:
Some of you are misunderstanding what this does. This isn't about Billy Bob's Motors "paying" a high school recruit $200,000 to appear on a billboard, or Toothless Tom's Autobody Shop slipping bags into a 50K sports car for a five-star.

It's about a player being paid for his autograph. Or Nike paying a player to appear in an advertisement. Appearance fees. Etc. etc. It's going to be much more player-centric than school-centric (i.e., Trevor Lawrence is going to get paid more than Shaq Quarterman).

All things being equal, and this being a free market, I think players are going to look at this and say "I can go play in a major media market in Miami (or LA, etc.) and have more opportunity to market myself, or I can go to Tuscaloosa/Athens/Ann Arbor."

Miami has a metro area of about 6 million people. If you don't think that will matter if this legislation passes and is accepted as part of the NCAA, you need to pick up an economics text book.
Click to expand...

This 100%. We stand to benefit as much as any school in the country from a marketability standpoint. The problem is, IMO, the big money SEC schools will still supplement any shortcomings via bags.
 
Advertisement
Two points to consider:
1. The recruits will now have to consider where can I attend that will give me the most exposure and clicks for autographs, billboards, and propel my popularity to the NFL?. Not even considering the $$$$$'s that would be involved.
2. The boondocks does not have the population to make billboards, and autographs effective. It Will be a huge advantage to get exposure in Miami, and other large cities, compared to small College towns USA that have little or no response to exposure by College athletes.
One more wrinkle that will be exploited is who will represent the athlete?....his parents, relatives, Coaches, etc.....lots of moving parts here.
 
canesdogo said:
2. The boondocks does not have the population to make billboards, and autographs effective. It Will be a huge advantage to get exposure in Miami, and other large cities, compared to small College towns USA that have little or no response to exposure by College athletes.
Click to expand...

This is being overlooked on this board. If Trevor Lawrence wants to schill for Nike with a billboard being placed on a gas station in Main Street in Clemson, South Carolina, he'd probably get a nice payday.

If his Nike poster goes up on I-95 in Downtown Miami, his pay day is going to be possibly life-changing.

That will matter now.
 
A lot of speculation on how this will end up. Only a few states have penned legislation (and now something in the house). The NCAA has not countered, but I'm sure Emmert will do something to fight for the bluebloods.

But right now, all we have is California legislation, and here is an example of their vision. An athlete, who in the offseason, can make money without using the university. Here is Jordan Hasay, who has 100K+ followers on Instagram promoting an item for hyperice. No idea, but I would guess she is making $10,000 doing this.



Sure, we can speculate on loopholes, but this thing is in its infancy. This thing is obviously going to get more detailed.
 
Advertisement
247 Canes said:
Tell me how
Click to expand...

Bigger markets = more demand = more eyeballs for the brands who will be paying these licensing fees = more money for the athlete.

It's why NBA players want to play in New York, LA, San Fran, and Chicago instead of New Orleans, Oklahoma City, etc. The BIG SCHOOLS are mostly in podunk towns; there simply isn't as much opportunity for "lots of autographs" in Clemson, SC (population 13,000) as there will be in Miami, FL (population 6 million).

For some athletes, their talent will transcend their location. Trevor Lawrence is going to get paid to be in a Nike commercial regardless of where he plays. But for roster players 15 through 85, the opportunities in a city like Miami are going to be much, much better than they will be in Clemson (or Tuscaloosa, or Gainesville, or Athens, or Ann Arbor, or South Bend, or Starkville, or...)

It's simple economics.
 
Again, a lot of you are getting it twisted. The University of Alabama will not be paying these players to appear at events.

Nike, and Coke, and New Era, and "insert brand name here" will be paying these licensing fees. If Nike wants to pay Deejay Dallas to show up at a grand opening event at a new store on South Beach, Deejay can 1) make Nike pay him an appearance fee, and 2) charge $10 (or $50, or $100) for any piece of memorabilia he signs at said event.

You think a guy who plays in a city with 6 million people is going to have a.) more or, b.) less opportunities than a guy who chooses to play at a big state school located in a town of 10K people?
 
JD08 said:
If you want to see every player's order of preference once this goes national, here it is.

View attachment 98196
Click to expand...

But why isn’t it already like this with the existing well established black market?

Clearly there’s some degree of correlation with Bama, OSU, and OU in the top 10, but Clemson doesn’t even crack the list, and a bunch of underachieving programs are in there as well.
Katzenboyer said:
Bigger markets = more demand = more eyeballs for the brands who will be paying these licensing fees = more money for the athlete.

It's why NBA players want to play in New York, LA, San Fran, and Chicago instead of New Orleans, Oklahoma City, etc. The BIG SCHOOLS are mostly in podunk towns; there simply isn't as much opportunity for "lots of autographs" in Clemson, SC (population 13,000) as there will be in Miami, FL (population 6 million).

For some athletes, their talent will transcend their location. Trevor Lawrence is going to get paid to be in a Nike commercial regardless of where he plays. But for roster players 15 through 85, the opportunities in a city like Miami are going to be much, much better than they will be in Clemson (or Tuscaloosa, or Gainesville, or Athens, or Ann Arbor, or South Bend, or Starkville, or...)

It's simple economics.
Click to expand...

Sure, but What’s to stop The booster with a car dealership in Tuscaloosa to just pay player 15-85 above market prices to appear on a billboard or ad or cutout or whatever. Who cares if nobody sees it?

If Bama, or generic big program have more of these big money boosters, then it would appear nothing changes in that regard.

Just not totally convinced it’s a net plus for us.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top