Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

N/P: Breaking News: Gov. Gavin Newsom of California will sign a bill to let college athletes make endorsement deals

Нина

By Нина,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

1of10Charnatives Mentor

1of10Charnatives

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, MadHatter said:

Whether they should be allowed to sign deals and be paid is a legitimate debate.

however, this bill is ridiculous and has no legal standing.  College athletes are governed by the ncaa.

 

On what legal basis does the NCAA have the right to restrict income of student athletes? They have long claimed this right and for a time it was allowed to pass on the justification that school, sports and work was too great of a burden on someone’s time, or that permitting jobs would be exploited by boosters to effectively pay kids under the table.

The theory was that this created an unfair recruiting advantage for larger schools with more resources, but let’s not pretend that the exposure of playing on national television doesn’t already do this. The only reason Steph Curry wound up at Davidson is because the ACC didn’t want him, not because Mckillop outdueled Williams and K in a recruiting battle.

But endorsement deals impose no meaningful burden upon a kids time or at least not one that pales in comparison to the burden imposed by playing itself, so the NCAA can’t plausibly make that argument. They can’t argue it creates an uneven playing field in recruiting. Anyone who can’t see television exposure already does that is a moron.

Once those arguments are dismissed, under what justification does the NCAA propose that it has any right to regulate or limit the income opportunities of young people just because they happen to be athletes at member institutions? Governing play and relevant issues related to it is fine, but we have a word for when someone else has complete control over what you can do.

The word is slavery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, jfra78 said:

I would rather there be some kind of salary. It seems that a lot of underhanded things that could be done with endorsements

Underhanded things are going to happen anyway. Endorsements are the most clear way to allow athletes complete freedom of how their likeness is used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MadHatter Rookie

MadHatter

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

On what legal basis does the NCAA have the right to restrict income of student athletes? They have long claimed this right and for a time it was allowed to pass on the justification that school, sports and work was too great of a burden on someone’s time, or that permitting jobs would be exploited by boosters to effectively pay kids under the table.

The theory was that this created an unfair recruiting advantage for larger schools with more resources, but let’s not pretend that the exposure of playing on national television doesn’t already do this. The only reason Steph Curry wound up at Davidson is because the ACC didn’t want him, not because Mckillop outdueled Williams and K in a recruiting battle.

But endorsement deals impose no meaningful burden upon a kids time or at least not one that pales in comparison to the burden imposed by playing itself, so the NCAA can’t plausibly make that argument. They can’t argue it creates an uneven playing field in recruiting. Anyone who can’t see television exposure already does that is a moron.

Once those arguments are dismissed, under what justification does the NCAA propose that it has any right to regulate or limit the income opportunities of young people just because they happen to be athletes at member institutions? Governing play and relevant issues related to it is fine, but we have a word for when someone else has complete control over what you can do.

The word is slavery.

Calling giving students full ride scholarships as slavery and plantation model is asinine

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1of10Charnatives Mentor

1of10Charnatives

Posted
Posted
Just now, 1of10Charnatives said:

Okay, let give you a full ride scholarship to the institution of your choice. Do you think that entitles me to say so in every aspect of your life?

 

7 minutes ago, MadHatter said:

Calling giving students full ride scholarships as slavery and plantation model is asinine

Btw you mentioned plantations, I did not, so don’t put words in my mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4Corners Grand Master

4Corners

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

 

Btw you mentioned plantations, I did not, so don’t put words in my mouth.

I don’t think comparing the NCAA model to slavery is very appropriate, but there is no doubt about it that the NCAA and schools exploit and profit off the college players - especially very marketable ones like Zion Williamson. Their could have been a video tape of Coach K handing Zion a duffel bag of cash and the NCAA wouldn’t have done anything about it. He was too valuable for their product and college basketball (especially ESPN). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...