OT: Huge win for college sports athletes from Supreme Court

Of course, it benefits those schools that can play this game. They can pass on costs easily in ticket prices and alumni contributions and get away with it. This will kill athletic departments of institutions that are struggling to keep pace. Non-rev sports just got significantly hurt. Plus, the bag game boosters can now donate in the open. Their attorneys and accountants may be happy. What's the fair market for a 5-star running back for the Alabama Crimson Tide?

I agree with your second point. Who knows? Collective bargaining. Tax implications. Box meet Pandora.
Hence the concerns of my AD-friend. They said if this rule applies to lower tier as it will be implemented in Power 5, they said next 5-10 years will see a culling of the herd at the DII and DIII levels. They can't really afford what they are doing now, so its either less scholly athletes and more walk ons or no program period.
 
Advertisement
Justice Kavanaugh bringing the heat.

“Nowhere else in America can businesses get away with agreeing not to pay their workers a fair market rate on the theory that their product is defined by not paying their workers a fair market rate. And under ordinary principles of antitrust law, it is not evident why college sports should be any different. The NCAA is not above the law.”

Unanimous decision 15-0
Calling MLB. Aaron Judge makes 10 million after years where he would be way higher on market value. All new MLB players do not make market value. Mookie Betts with the Sox. They get controlled as that is the model. Judge will breakdown before being he can do market.
 
Schools don't pay coaches, booster & fan revenue does.
Coaches are paid by the Universities and their salaries are generally approved by a board of regents. It isn't simply a booster cutting a check to the coach. Just ask FSU who is in the hole for Willie Taggert and cutting back on athletic administration and sports budgets. Also, football and basketball revenue help pay for non revenue sports including Title 9 sports.
 
Last edited:
Hence the concerns of my AD-friend. They said if this rule applies to lower tier as it will be implemented in Power 5, they said next 5-10 years will see a culling of the herd at the DII and DIII levels. They can't really afford what they are doing now, so its either less scholly athletes and more walk ons or no program period.
This combined with Title IX is an absolute death knell.
 
Advertisement
Beyond the geography (who wants to live in Lincoln), the money disparity, which is already huge, will only get bigger and bigger. Even a place like Rutgers might be more attractive to an athlete, being in the NY/NJ market.
I get your point, but NE has boosters with money and a strong fanbase. Don't forget about Omaha. I lived there many years ago. Saturdays shut down for NE football. That's when I did all my shopping as I hated Nebraska football and could get in and out of stores with no problem. They're losing out on recruits and the program has been down for a while, but it isn't because of money.

People seem to think Alabama will benefit, but somehow Nebraska will be hurt. Maybe true, but not for marketing reasons. Who gives **** about Alabama except people who live there and that's only 1/2 of the state. There's more money in Nebraska than Alabama. Alabama just happens to be at the apex of college football. Otherwise, they're just another southern state with high income disparity and high poverty.
 
Last edited:
Hence the concerns of my AD-friend. They said if this rule applies to lower tier as it will be implemented in Power 5, they said next 5-10 years will see a culling of the herd at the DII and DIII levels. They can't really afford what they are doing now, so its either less scholly athletes and more walk ons or no program period.
I think DIII will be okay since they don't give athletic scholarships. What is the fair market value of a men's lacrosse player for Ferrum College? $5? These smaller liberal arts colleges are going to go the way of the dodo because of rising education costs and shrinking enrollment. Their athletic departments will be the first to go.

DII athletic departments are in real trouble.

P5 and G5 will be cutting sports. Harvard squash and fencing should remain safe. At least the Poison Ivy League will not be too significantly impacted.

You bring up an interesting point about walk-ons? Maybe no scholarships but if there is collective bargaining what is the fair market value of a walk-on? $50k should cover all expenses at Florida for an out of state corner back who is option B. Might be a nice way to work around the 25 and 85 cap.
 
Last edited:
In class at FSU, Derrick Mitchell said he was paid 750$ a month, I think, to handle his expenses minus room/board. 750$ a month puts them near the bottom tier of college spenders per month. (Most kids are skating by on student loans/schollys/Dad's bank account)
 
Advertisement
I’m so confused;

Let me back this up really quick. For ya’ll that think this is a good thing for Miami, this point is directly aimed at u:

The excuse for yrs is that Miami, since Shalala, haven’t cared about sports. The excuse for yrs have been how can a small, private institution w/ limited resources compete w/ big state schools? The excuse for yrs was we don’t have boosters like the big state schools. The excuse for yrs have been we can’t compete in the bag game w/ big state schools.

Aight; ffwd to 06/21/21: Now the bag game, essentially, is going to be legalized. Yeah, yeah, they’ll impose some “restrictions & guidelines” to mitigate under the table stuff, but let’s be real, Pandora’s box have been given a giant key. So now all of a sudden, the excuses we’ve used is now, what, disappeared? So we got boosters coming out the woodworks now? I mean our biggest, known booster in yrs past didn’t even have real $. So all of a sudden, The University is going to stop being small & private, and allocate resources to compete w/ big state schools?

Like, Fr, Fr make it make sense. All I see is schools like Bama & UGA no longer offering $100-250k but now they can openly offer $300-400k to 5 star players b/c that’s now an open investment. I can see a school like OK St who has a multi billionaire booster getting some skin in this. I’m not seeing how this helps us, IF the excuses used to justify & validate the Tom Fckery we’ve been exposed to is indeed valid.
If the AD had a lick of business savy he would use our location in a large metro area to allow companies to use the U and their players in advertising to help generate revenue. The more we win the more money we would bring in. We sit on a hotbed of billions of dollars just by virtue of being located in Miami. The question is does UM have the brains to use this to their advantage.
 
If the AD had a lick of business savy he would use our location in a large metro area to allow companies to use the U and their players in advertising to help generate revenue. The more we win the more money we would bring in. We sit on a hotbed of billions of dollars just by virtue of being located in Miami. The question is does UM have the brains to use this to their advantage.
I think Blake James goes beyond a dolt. However, why does everyone think these companies are lining up to get endorsements from college players? How many professional athletes in South Florida have sponsorship deals beyond maybe sneaker loyalty deals for NBA players? Not too many.
 
Perhaps the state of Florida themselves will use their tax revenue to incentivive FL players to stay put?

AND,

To get subsidies from the state, Universities must offer __(fill in the blank) ___ to help keep FL universities on equal footing.

State of FL, can help turn this into a win, maybe.
 
Advertisement
Time will tell how this truly re-shapes the NCAA-School-Coaches-Athlete relationship(s).

Doesn't look great for NCAA in terms of maintaining power/rules status quo.
It will probably guarantee a 12 game playoff (and further expansion). Schools are going to need all the revenue they can garner in a sport where very few are profitable.
 
I think DIII will be okay since they don't give athletic scholarships. What is the fair market value of a men's lacrosse player for Ferrum College? $5? These smaller liberal arts colleges are going to go the way of the dodo because of rising education costs and shrinking enrollment. Their athletic departments will be the first to go.

DII athletic departments are in real trouble.

P5 and G5 will be cutting sports. Harvard squash and fencing should remain safe. At least the Poison Ivy League will not be too significantly impacted.

You bring up an interesting point about walk-ons? Maybe no scholarships but if there is collective bargaining what is the fair market value of a walk-on? $50k should cover all expenses at Florida for an out of state corner back who is option B. Might be a nice way to work around the 25 and 85 cap.
DII athletes mostly get partial scholarships. If P5 and G5 schools cut programs, there will be some pretty good athletes dropping down.
 
You think the transfer market is hot right now, wait until John Q football and all his friends don't feel they're bringing in what they should at school x, y, and z.

College sports are becoming more and more like the pros every day. There's a time in the not so distant future that I could see myself tuning out if this goes the direction I think it will.
 
Advertisement
However, why does everyone think these companies are lining up to get endorsements from college players?

This is unchartered territory no doubt, but I would imagine that shoe companies like Nike & Adidas would be able to steer kids to certain schools legally now. And the next time we get a producer like Chad Thomas, He'll be able to capitalize/monetize off of His talents.
 
This is unchartered territory no doubt, but I would imagine that shoe companies like Nike & Adidas would be able to steer kids to certain schools legally now. And the next time we get a producer like Chad Thomas, He'll be able to capitalize/monetize off of His talents.
Adidas and Nike have been doing that under the table with basketball for years now, so agreed. But that's not really as much of a thing with football. How many NFL players have shoe deals? They aren't going to be giving half a college football roster 5 or 6 figure shoe deals.

And we have had literally one player who was also a producer (maybe two, I think Jaelen Phillips was tied into music IIRC). It's not like this is some common occurrence that is going to move the needle on any program.
 
Adidas and Nike have been doing that under the table with basketball for years now, so agreed. But that's not really as much of a thing with football. How many NFL players have shoe deals? They aren't going to be giving half a college football roster 5 or 6 figure shoe deals.

And we have had literally one player who was also a producer (maybe two, I think Jaelen Phillips was tied into music IIRC). It's not like this is some common occurrence that is going to move the needle on any program.

Not every College team, but Phil Knight has deep pockets, He'll have Oregon stacked.
 
Not every College team, but Phil Knight has deep pockets, He'll have Oregon stacked.
Phil Knight is 83 years old, is no longer the CEO and Nike shareholders would have a problem with that. But that is also exactly one school. Again, they have been doing this for years in basketball but never football because 1) it does not make business sense from the size of the roster and 2) NFL players do not get massive shoe deals. Sorry but I am not buying it.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top