the business model of paying players in CBA

[blion72]

the media analysts all seem to be arriving at the same place - NCAA is now on its death bed as it can no longer enforce any governance due to legal losses all based on anti-trust. Given that argument, there is no room to create any kind of succeeding organization like a CFB "czar"". The argument then goes that if we pay the players under a collective bargaining agreement, then you can have rules as the anti-trust arguments will no longer hold up in litigation. if we assume that is the only path forward, then what does this business model look like?

today, I heard a lawyer talking on ESPNU who identified some of the concepts. he did not walk back through the anti-trust arguments but just discussed the future CFB model. Several concepts:

• Players get paid under CBA. Do they all get same wage scale or how does pay work? He said NFL model meaning not all on same pay.
• Does each team have its own pay scale so USC might pay more than UCLA? Yes - each team has its own comp but would need to have a "cap" like NFL.
• Is there NIL (the real stuff no pay for play) - yes via advertisers but no more side pay from boosters as that would defeat the cap model.
• Who enforces the rules? the new CFB office = NFL model
• Are there "owners" or private investors? Not clear but evidently could be in play.
• Who "owns" the brand identity (i.e. Buckeyes look and feel - trademark, etc) - schools
• Is the team a distinct corporation from the university - most likely have to be that way. Team licenses the brand from the school.
• Are the players students? Not required and reasons to ensure they are not students. No scholarship relationship that might tie this to Title IX requirements to pay ALL athletes the same.
• Who owns the stadium and facilities? Likely an independent corporation - maybe not even the one with the team.
• Who gets the TV money? The CFB league and dispensed to the teams (not the schools).
• Who runs the payroll for the players? Best model is the team has its own payroll for coaches, staff and players - no school connection. Autonomous moodel needed to avoid Title IX.
• Is there "plenty" of money to make this work? NOT if the school has to be the administrator and the players are paid by the school and on scholarship. That leads to all the athletes getting paid which will not work.

On this last point there seemed to be a whole debate. Some of the analysts thought there would be no problem with money. the lawyer said the non revenue sports would have to go club.

anyone on here know university finances to the point of what this would mean?

 

[Ludd]

the media analysts all seem to be arriving at the same place - NCAA is now on its death bed as it can no longer enforce any governance due to legal losses all based on anti-trust. Given that argument, there is no room to create any kind of succeeding organization like a CFB "czar"". The argument then goes that if we pay the players under a collective bargaining agreement, then you can have rules as the anti-trust arguments will no longer hold up in litigation. if we assume that is the only path forward, then what does this business model look like?

today, I heard a lawyer talking on ESPNU who identified some of the concepts. he did not walk back through the anti-trust arguments but just discussed the future CFB model. Several concepts:

• Players get paid under CBA. Do they all get same wage scale or how does pay work? He said NFL model meaning not all on same pay.
• Does each team have its own pay scale so USC might pay more than UCLA? Yes - each team has its own comp but would need to have a "cap" like NFL.
• Is there NIL (the real stuff no pay for play) - yes via advertisers but no more side pay from boosters as that would defeat the cap model.
• Who enforces the rules? the new CFB office = NFL model
• Are there "owners" or private investors? Not clear but evidently could be in play.
• Who "owns" the brand identity (i.e. Buckeyes look and feel - trademark, etc) - schools
• Is the team a distinct corporation from the university - most likely have to be that way. Team licenses the brand from the school.
• Are the players students? Not required and reasons to ensure they are not students. No scholarship relationship that might tie this to Title IX requirements to pay ALL athletes the same.
• Who owns the stadium and facilities? Likely an independent corporation - maybe not even the one with the team.
• Who gets the TV money? The CFB league and dispensed to the teams (not the schools).
• Who runs the payroll for the players? Best model is the team has its own payroll for coaches, staff and players - no school connection. Autonomous moodel needed to avoid Title IX.
• Is there "plenty" of money to make this work? NOT if the school has to be the administrator and the players are paid by the school and on scholarship. That leads to all the athletes getting paid which will not work.

On this last point there seemed to be a whole debate. Some of the analysts thought there would be no problem with money. the lawyer said the non revenue sports would have to go club.

anyone on here know university finances to the point of what this would mean?

So the school has to pay the players, but they get none of the TV money or anything else and the team is a separate entity. I would have to assume they would still have to pay the players for merchandising rights…so really the school gets nothing from this. Why would they do it?

 

[laKavosiey-st lion]

AAAAAANNNNDDD, the end of romance boys, it is here

 

[Midnighter]

AAAAAANNNNDDD, the end of romance boys, it is here

 

[PSUFTG2]

Why would they do it?

Because they have to?

 

[Ludd]

Because they have to?

Why? Just dump football.

 

[EPC FAN]

Why? Just dump football.

I’m for dumping football. Let those slimy NFL owners pay to develop players. Colleges should be in the business of education, not athletics. JMO!

 

[blion72]

So the school has to pay the players, but they get none of the TV money or anything else and the team is a separate entity. I would have to assume they would still have to pay the players for merchandising rights…so really the school gets nothing from this. Why would they do it?

they were bouncing around a lot. I assume that if the schools are paying then they get a portion of the TV $$ to cover the payroll. Every time they mentioned the schools paying it turned back to them paying all the athletes the same amount due to Title IX. Some of the media types keep saying there is plenty of money for everyone.

 

[kgilbert78]

...and what's to stop players from playing more than 4 seasons. Some baseball and hockey players do ok money-wise playing in the top minor league most of their careers. If they are employees, does it matter??

 

[leinbacker]

the media analysts all seem to be arriving at the same place - NCAA is now on its death bed as it can no longer enforce any governance due to legal losses all based on anti-trust. Given that argument, there is no room to create any kind of succeeding organization like a CFB "czar"". The argument then goes that if we pay the players under a collective bargaining agreement, then you can have rules as the anti-trust arguments will no longer hold up in litigation. if we assume that is the only path forward, then what does this business model look like?

today, I heard a lawyer talking on ESPNU who identified some of the concepts. he did not walk back through the anti-trust arguments but just discussed the future CFB model. Several concepts:

• Players get paid under CBA. Do they all get same wage scale or how does pay work? He said NFL model meaning not all on same pay.
• Does each team have its own pay scale so USC might pay more than UCLA? Yes - each team has its own comp but would need to have a "cap" like NFL.
• Is there NIL (the real stuff no pay for play) - yes via advertisers but no more side pay from boosters as that would defeat the cap model.
• Who enforces the rules? the new CFB office = NFL model
• Are there "owners" or private investors? Not clear but evidently could be in play.
• Who "owns" the brand identity (i.e. Buckeyes look and feel - trademark, etc) - schools
• Is the team a distinct corporation from the university - most likely have to be that way. Team licenses the brand from the school.
• Are the players students? Not required and reasons to ensure they are not students. No scholarship relationship that might tie this to Title IX requirements to pay ALL athletes the same.
• Who owns the stadium and facilities? Likely an independent corporation - maybe not even the one with the team.
• Who gets the TV money? The CFB league and dispensed to the teams (not the schools).
• Who runs the payroll for the players? Best model is the team has its own payroll for coaches, staff and players - no school connection. Autonomous moodel needed to avoid Title IX.
• Is there "plenty" of money to make this work? NOT if the school has to be the administrator and the players are paid by the school and on scholarship. That leads to all the athletes getting paid which will not work.

On this last point there seemed to be a whole debate. Some of the analysts thought there would be no problem with money. the lawyer said the non revenue sports would have to go club.

anyone on here know university finances to the point of what this would mean?

if players are “employees”, can employers impose a non-compete clause?

 

[JWB389]

• Is there NIL (the real stuff no pay for play) - yes via advertisers but no more side pay from boosters as that would defeat the cap model.

I don't see how they regulate this. There is a lot of gray area here. For example, how do you draw a line between a booster and a local car dealer? Aren't they often the same thing?

 

[BobPSU92]

How is the Continental Basketball Association relevant?

 

[BobPSU92]

if players are “employees”, can employers impose a non-compete clause?

Does that mean they wouldn’t have to compete for their school either?

 

[PSUFBFAN]

I don't see how they regulate this. There is a lot of gray area here. For example, how do you draw a line between a booster and a local car dealer? Aren't they often the same thing?

They will NEVER stop the now legally accepted behavior of bribing players to attend a particular school because of one reason:

Unlike the NFL, there will NEVER be a draft where players are assigned to certain teams. As long as the players have a free choice in which school they choose (and that will always be the situation), there will always be boosters attempting to sweeten the pot regardless of how much the players may be legally paid by the school through TV revenue generated contracts.

 

[GrimReaper]

They will NEVER stop the now legally accepted behavior of bribing players to attend a particular school because of one reason:

Unlike the NFL, there will NEVER be a draft where players are assigned to certain teams. As long as the players have a free choice in which school they choose (and that will always be the situation), there will always be boosters attempting to sweeten the pot regardless of how much the players may be legally paid by the school through TV revenue generated contracts.

A draft is almost certainly not in the cards. If college sports want to eliminate a free-for-all then it has to allow for players' unions and collective bargaining agreements. Otherwise, chaos will reign (not that I'm agin' it).

 

[step.eng69]

How is the Continental Basketball Association relevant?

Thanks BOb.....hate it when posters use an acronym that doesn't relate to their post.

 

[step.eng69]

A draft is almost certainly not in the cards. If college sports want to eliminate a free-for-all then it has to allow for players' unions and collective bargaining agreements. Otherwise, chaos will reign (not that I'm agin' it).

CHAOS:

• The formless matter supposed to have been created-evolved after the creation of the NCAA.

 

[Moogy]

AAAAAANNNNDDD, the end of romance boys, it is here

It was fake the whole time. Good riddance.

 

[laKavosiey-st lion]

It was fake the whole time. Good riddance.

Nothin faked carrying the goalposts up college ave brah. ……sigh

 

[GrimReaper]

Nothin faked carrying the goalposts up college ave brah. ……sigh

That can still be done, albeit without blissful ignorance.

 

[blion72]

They will NEVER stop the now legally accepted behavior of bribing players to attend a particular school because of one reason:

Unlike the NFL, there will NEVER be a draft where players are assigned to certain teams. As long as the players have a free choice in which school they choose (and that will always be the situation), there will always be boosters attempting to sweeten the pot regardless of how much the players may be legally paid by the school through TV revenue generated contracts.

I think the assumption was that the CBA and salary cap would keep on the rails. The salary cap in the NFL doesn't prevent a player doing ads for an insurance company but it does prevent a group of fans getting together to provide extra $$$ for say the Steelers to bring in a high $$$ free agent that would take them over the cap. that was mentioned on the show. there are already established tests of the intended purpose of the funds.

the part that was less clear to me was how they avoid the same anti-trust arguments that are used today against the NCAA.

 

[Moogy]

Nothin faked carrying the goalposts up college ave brah. ……sigh

And now you can't do that because the players are getting paid out in the open, brosef?!

 

[laKavosiey-st lion]

And now you can't do that because the players are getting paid out in the open, brosef?!

Well that and the mace. And horses. Mostly the mace

 

[LionJim]

Well that and the mace. And horses. Mostly the mace

You don’t say.