Saban and SEC members speak to US Congress re CFB future(s)

[blion72]

I just saw their comments to US Congress re CFB. They nailed it that we got here totally by litigation all of which focused on the NCAA had no right to enforce rules based on anti-trust arguments. They were totally correct about true NIL (i.e. LSU gymnast Olivia, Caleb and Wendys, Byrce and Dr Pepper,, etc). Those ar true NIL. How can you have NIL $$$ going to a person who hardly anyone knows or would recognize? Payment to that type of person is pay for play.

They also pointed out the numerous difficulties of paying players under a CBA. Many disadvantages to players also.

Then they hit on the tricky item of the revenue sports have traditionally funded the non-revenue sports. This also opened up the discussion around Title IX, which is probably where those favoring making the players employees comes in. If you can keep them outside the athletic dept then you can get past Title IX. I am not sure if you try to split all the revenue equally among all athletes you would have a working model.

Saban said we need national anti trust immunity to get past all the States acting on their own.

 

[Nitt1300]

We love to pretend that it is or ever was an honest game.

 

[BobPSU92]

“College” Football’s future.

 

[LionJim]

How can you have NIL $$$ going to a person who hardly anyone knows or would recognize?

That’s an impossible standard to uphold or even define. We live in a capitalist society, warts and all.

 

[LionJim]

We love to pretend that it is or ever was an honest game.

We’ve all seen all these Alabama recruits with their fancy new cars.

 

[PSUFTG2]

We love to pretend that it is or ever was an honest game.

Ever perfect? Certainly not.

A hell of a lot different 40 years ago, 30 years ago, even 5 or 10 years ago than it is now? Absolutely.

Was that difference, back in the day(s), better? Who knows, everyone might have their unique opinion. But I don't know how anyone who values decency, character, values, or any of that stuff can look at the current state of affairs - as it relates to every aspect of the sport business - and say "Yep, I love this".

 

[Midnighter]

I just saw their comments to US Congress re CFB. They nailed it that we got here totally by litigation all of which focused on the NCAA had no right to enforce rules based on anti-trust arguments. They were totally correct about true NIL (i.e. LSU gymnast Olivia, Caleb and Wendys, Byrce and Dr Pepper,, etc). Those ar true NIL. How can you have NIL $$$ going to a person who hardly anyone knows or would recognize? Payment to that type of person is pay for play.

They also pointed out the numerous difficulties of paying players under a CBA. Many disadvantages to players also.

Then they hit on the tricky item of the revenue sports have traditionally funded the non-revenue sports. This also opened up the discussion around Title IX, which is probably where those favoring making the players employees comes in. If you can keep them outside the athletic dept then you can get past Title IX. I am not sure if you try to split all the revenue equally among all athletes you would have a working model.

Saban said we need national anti trust immunity to get past all the States acting on their own.

 

[GrimReaper]

I just saw their comments to US Congress re CFB. They nailed it that we got here totally by litigation all of which focused on the NCAA had no right to enforce rules based on anti-trust arguments. They were totally correct about true NIL (i.e. LSU gymnast Olivia, Caleb and Wendys, Byrce and Dr Pepper,, etc). Those ar true NIL. How can you have NIL $$$ going to a person who hardly anyone knows or would recognize? Payment to that type of person is pay for play.

They also pointed out the numerous difficulties of paying players under a CBA. Many disadvantages to players also.

Then they hit on the tricky item of the revenue sports have traditionally funded the non-revenue sports. This also opened up the discussion around Title IX, which is probably where those favoring making the players employees comes in. If you can keep them outside the athletic dept then you can get past Title IX. I am not sure if you try to split all the revenue equally among all athletes you would have a working model.

Saban said we need national anti trust immunity to get past all the States acting on their own.

I love Nick Saban, but he should stick to what he's good at which is football and coaching it (Nick Saban on Anti-Trust Law. Now that's a seminart I'm going to rush to sign up for). The schools, their AD's, conference commissioners, and the NCAA brought college sports to where they are today. Let them continue to twist in the wind, allowing the noose to tighten through the natural force of gravity.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Ever perfect? Certainly not.

A hell of a lot different 40 years ago, 30 years ago, even 5 or 10 years ago than it is now? Absolutely.

Was that difference, back in the day(s), better? Who knows, everyone might have their unique opinion. But I don't know how anyone who values decency, character, values, or any of that stuff can look at the current state of affairs - as it relates to every aspect of the sport business - and say "Yep, I love this".

I don’t like it, but it’s at least being permitted now. Even in Reggie Bush era there were consequences (albeit delayed).

 

[Ludd]

I love Nick Saban, but he should stick to what he's good at which is football and coaching it (Nick Saban on Anti-Trust Law. Now that's a seminart I'm going to rush to sign up for). The schools, their AD's, conference commissioners, and the NCAA brought college sports to where they are today. Let them continue to twist in the wind, allowing the noose to tighten through the natural force of gravity.

I’m not sure why so many are cheering for the destruction of the best sport out there. Makes no sense to me.

 

[Midnighter]

I’m not sure why so many are cheering for the destruction of the best sport out there. Makes no sense to me.

College coaches making millions a year and able to leave without penalty makes no sense when the players are not treated the same. This is the chickens coming home to roost.

 

[GrimReaper]

I’m not sure why so many are cheering for the destruction of the best sport out there. Makes no sense to me.

NCAA made the rules in violation of the law and now they want someone else to fix the destruction that they wrought. Nah.

 

[BobPSU92]

Saban for President!

 

[Ludd]

College coaches making millions a year and able to leave without penalty makes no sense when the players are not treated the same. This is the chickens coming home to roost.

The CEO at my company makes far more than I do….is that unfair? Who cares how much the coaches make? And I would guess far more get fired than leave voluntarily. So maybe some loyalty on both sides would go a long way as opposed to fans wanting to fire a coach every time he loses a game. And the chickens coming home to roost will only ruin the best sport going…doesn’t seem like something to cheer for.

 

[Ludd]

NCAA made the rules in violation of the law and now they want someone else to fix the destruction that they wrought. Nah.

Doesn’t mean burning the whole thing to the ground is something we should hope for.

 

[GrimReaper]

Doesn’t mean burning the whole thing to the ground is something we should hope for.

They did it and continue to do it to themselves.

 

[BobPSU92]

Doesn’t mean burning the whole thing to the ground is something we should hope for.

Too big to fail?

 

[Ludd]

They did it and continue to do it to themselves.

Agree, but again no need to cheer it on.

 

[blion72]

Ever perfect? Certainly not.

A hell of a lot different 40 years ago, 30 years ago, even 5 or 10 years ago than it is now? Absolutely.

Was that difference, back in the day(s), better? Who knows, everyone might have their unique opinion. But I don't know how anyone who values decency, character, values, or any of that stuff can look at the current state of affairs - as it relates to every aspect of the sport business - and say "Yep, I love this".

I think the point of Saban and the SEC contingent were to point out different futures. It is fair to say we got where we are due to litigation, and even if you had some successor to the ncaa it would wind up in the same place if it tried to create structure and rules. It looked like the point they were making was you were going to wind up with a couple futures. One where the BIG and SEC form a super conference and they could create whatever rules they wanted and enforce them since anti-trust suits wouldn't work. Or the other future was player being paid where they might not even be students = just employees.

i think they were trying to say that all the futures were not good for the sport or the athletes.

 

[GrimReaper]

I think the point of Saban and the SEC contingent were to point out different futures. It is fair to say we got where we are due to litigation, and even if you had some successor to the ncaa it would wind up in the same place if it tried to create structure and rules. It looked like the point they were making was you were going to wind up with a couple futures. One where the BIG and SEC form a super conference and they could create whatever rules they wanted and enforce them since anti-trust suits wouldn't work. Or the other future was player being paid where they might not even be students = just employees.

i think they were trying to say that all the futures were not good for the sport or the athletes.

Why would anti-trust rules not apply to an SEC/BIG ""super conference?"

 

[PSUSignore]

College coaches making millions a year and able to leave without penalty makes no sense when the players are not treated the same. This is the chickens coming home to roost.

Except there is a penalty for coaches leaving, they have contracts with buyouts. I don't know why so many keep parroting this as justification for athletes to transfer at will with no repercussions as they are completely different scenarios. Players have no contractual requirements or penalties for leaving, coaches do.

 

[GrimReaper]

Except there is a penalty for coaches leaving, they have contracts with buyouts. I don't know why so many keep parroting this as justification for athletes to transfer at will with no repercussions as they are completely different scenarios. Players have no contractual requirements or penalties for leaving, coaches do.

The penalties for coaches leaving are relatively paltry (Dan Lanning being a notable exception and that will be fixed in his next contract) and they are almost always picked up by their next employer.

 

[Nitt1300]

trying to think of a more undesirable grouping than SEC coaches and Congress- and coming up blank

 

[Midnighter]

Except there is a penalty for coaches leaving, they have contracts with buyouts. I don't know why so many keep parroting this as justification for athletes to transfer at will with no repercussions as they are completely different scenarios. Players have no contractual requirements or penalties for leaving, coaches do.

Only until recently could you transfer without penalty. Coaches used to control the keys to that too, and now they don’t.

 

[razpsu]

Let’s put Congress in charge of it.
what could go wrong.

 

[Ludd]

The penalties for coaches leaving are relatively paltry (Dan Lanning being a notable exception and that will be fixed in his next contract) and they are almost always picked up by their next employer.

Why would you want to keep a coach who doesn’t want t to be there?

 

[GrimReaper]

Why would you want to keep a coach who doesn’t want t to be there?

I dunno, ask Pat Kraft.

 

[Midnighter]

Why would you want to keep a coach who doesn’t want t to be there?

Why would you want to keep a player who doesn’t want to be there?