Trump signs executive order aimed to "save" college sports

[18IsTheMan]

It hopes to eliminate pay-for-play inducements and will employ the Dept of Education to flex its muscle on institutions who don't play by the rules.

Any fan would have to agree with this line from the order: "While changes providing some increased benefits and flexibility to student-athletes were overdue and should be maintained, the inability to maintain reasonable rules and guardrails is a mortal threat to most college sports."

It also seeks to prevent college athletes from becoming employees. Many fans see the athletes becoming employees as being the only way to come up with solutions as you could then have a CBA and contracts.

Orders the increase of scholarships for non-revenue sports.

I agree with much of what its stated objectives are but don't really see much being accomplished with it.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

In other words, we are going to return college athletics to amateur status
No one is required to play for a college and receive a free education with benefits.

 

[18IsTheMan]

In other words, we are going to return college athletics to amateur status
No one is required to play for a college and receive a free education with benefits.

My take all along has been that nobody is compelled to play college sports.

It's not exploitation if you willingly choose of your own volition to participate. Now, perhaps as a kid in high school you see college sports as the best or maybe only option for you, but it's still your choice. This isn't China where they go out and rip a kid out of their home and send them off to a training camp for gymnastics.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Government involvement in private enterprise.

This always ends well.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Government involvement in private enterprise.

This always ends well.

I agree in general that government mucks up most everything it touches, however college athletics is unfortunately entering the realm of racketeering with all types of seedy outside forces looking to cash in and needs to be cleaned up.

 

[Piscis]

I agree in general that government mucks up most everything it touches, however college athletics is unfortunately entering the realm of racketeering with all types of seedy outside forces looking to cash in and needs to be cleaned up.

I still say the only real solution is going to have to come from the fans and the free market. When the fans of the 120 or so programs who don't have deep enough pockets to buy their way into the CFP with a reasonable chance of winning the championship decide to stop sending in money and buying tickets, those programs will have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to continue fielding a team in the top tier of college football. When there are only a couple dozen programs left competing, the tv money will dry up and then the system will fundamentally change.

Govt. intervention is only going to make things worse. The problems will change but the new problems will probably be worse than the current problems.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Government involvement in private enterprise.

This always ends well.

I don't know if it fully falls under private enterprise. Much of college football falls under athletic departments at state schools. The EO seems to tie regulations to those schools that receive federal funding and threatening cutoff of funding if they don't comply.

 

[Cobie]

Government involvement in private enterprise.

This always ends well.

Government meddling is how it started.

Let's see if they can now unwind the misguided actions of Gavin Newsom and a crooked judge to salvage the integrity of the game.

 

[adcoop]

It hopes to eliminate pay-for-play inducements and will employ the Dept of Education to flex its muscle on institutions who don't play by the rules.

Any fan would have to agree with this line from the order: "While changes providing some increased benefits and flexibility to student-athletes were overdue and should be maintained, the inability to maintain reasonable rules and guardrails is a mortal threat to most college sports."

It also seeks to prevent college athletes from becoming employees. Many fans see the athletes becoming employees as being the only way to come up with solutions as you could then have a CBA and contracts.

Orders the increase of scholarships for non-revenue sports.

I agree with much of what its stated objectives are but don't really see much being accomplished with it.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has already shown its hand on this one. ....and even Trump doesn't have the power to move 9 individuals who know they will be there after he leaves. Another media play, but have at it.

 

[Gamecock Jacque]

Government meddling is how it started.

Let's see if they can now unwind the misguided actions of Gavin Newsom and a crooked judge to salvage the integrity of the game.

More like the actions of the Supreme Court.

 

[Cobie]

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has already shown its hand on this one. ....and even Trump doesn't have the power to move 9 individuals who know they will be there after he leaves. Another media play, but have at it.

Actually, the order is more a statement of intent than a game-changer, and its real impact may hinge on how agencies like the Department of Education implement it and whether courts uphold its provisions.

Anything to get the ball rolling and this is a positive move in that direction.

 

[Cobie]

More like the actions of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court only upheld. If it's not in existence, that never happens.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has already shown its hand on this one. ....and even Trump doesn't have the power to move 9 individuals who know they will be there after he leaves. Another media play, but have at it.

We shall see. The current court has handed Trump some huge wins so far this term...and some notable losses.

 

[adcoop]

We shall see. The current court has handed Trump some huge wins so far this term...and some notable losses.

The court hasn't changed since Trump was there the first time. Will be dealing with similar issues. It's good to have hope, but this is my domain. I know how it operates. This is a 6-3 L at best. Probably 7-2. Trump has the Old Guard in Thomas and Alito, maybe Gorsuch, but that's it as far as this issue goes.

 

[18IsTheMan]

The court hasn't changed since Trump was there the first time. Will be dealing with similar issues. It's good to have hope, but this is my domain. I know how it operates. This is a 6-3 L at best. Probably 7-2. Trump has the Old Guard in Thomas and Alito, maybe Gorsuch, but that's it as far as this issue goes.

Well, the makeup the court hasn't changed, but it of course changed with the confirmation of Ketanji during Biden's term. Philosophically no change as she replaced Breyer who was one of the strongest liberals. One thing I know from following SCOTUS closely for a few decades is that it can often surprise you with its rulings, though not always for the ruling itself but who sides with which side. Though in most cases the surprises come with presumably conservative justices siding with the left side of the court.

 

[Mr. Belvedere]

I agree in general that government mucks up most everything it touches, however college athletics is unfortunately entering the realm of racketeering with all types of seedy outside forces looking to cash in and needs to be cleaned up.

this

 

[adcoop]

Well, the makeup the court hasn't changed, but it of course changed with the confirmation of Ketanji during Biden's term. Philosophically no change as she replaced Breyer who was one of the strongest liberals. One thing I know from following SCOTUS closely for a few decades is that it can often surprise you with its rulings, though not always for the ruling itself but who sides with which side. Though in most cases the surprises come with presumably conservative justices siding with the left side of the court.

Don't quite know what you were doing here, but you answered your own questions with your final sentence. Would have some pause if this issue was being decided today when Trump is probably at his strongest. However, this case probably won't get to the Supremes until he is about to leave or has already left. None of these schools will take this lying down. All will sue and it will meander its way through the courts and die. This is an issue where you make too many enemies no matter your political persuasion. Messing with the money of old and large institutions whose roots run deep does not turn out well most times.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Government meddling is how it started.

Let's see if they can now unwind the misguided actions of Gavin Newsom and a crooked judge to salvage the integrity of the game.

Umm No.
You need to acquaint yourself how the Supreme Court made clear in its unanimous 2021 NCAA v. Alston decision
In addition currently, six states have passed NIL legislation at the state level (California, Florida, Colorado, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Michigan) , As of mid-February, 39 states have passed, currently/previously proposed, or plan to propose NIL legislation, so assuming just one Governor is responsible is to be seriously misinformed.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Don't quite know what you were doing here, but you answered your own questions with your final sentence. Would have some pause if this issue was being decided today when Trump is probably at his strongest. However, this case probably won't get to the Supremes until he is about to leave or has already left. None of these schools will take this lying down. All will sue and it will meander its way to the courts and die. This is an issue where you make too many enemies no matter your political persuasion. Messing with the money of old and large institutions whose roots run deep does not turn out well most times.

We shall see. The EO contains a number of elements not covered in the Alson ruling. Main elements of the EO also do not contradict the Alston ruling. Rather it seeks to close some loopholes that were not addressed by SCOTUS. That they chose not to weigh in on those 2 glaring issues is telling.

 

[adcoop]

We shall see. The EO contains a number of elements not covered in the Alson ruling. Main elements of the EO also do not contradict the Alston ruling. Rather it seeks to close some loopholes that were not addressed by SCOTUS. That they chose not to weigh in on those 2 glaring issues is telling.

Also, the EO is demanding that the schools fix issues that they didn't create and are not involved with. For example, universities have nothing to do with with these NIL Collectives that are everywhere. Now, the EO may hold some weight with the House vs NCAA settlement which now allows the schools to pay the players. So, you kill that and go back to the NIL Collectives as the source to pay players? Don't see that as a solution. I think the only thing the government should do now is help broker how the money is going to be distributed, and how its managed. Threatening schools with funding just potentially throws us back to the place we are at now. The Wild, Wild, West where anything goes.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Saban sums it up rather well in his statement supporting the EO:

"I think we sort of need to make a decision here relative to—do we want to have an education-based model, which I think the President made a huge step toward doing that, or do we want to have universities sponsor professional teams? I think most people would choose the former."

These are the only two options. I would say at this point we are closer to, and there's a lot of momentum moving towards, universities sponsoring professional teams.

Nick Saban Opens Up About Donald Trump's College Sports Executive Order

The former Alabama head coach believes this is a 'huge step.'

www.si.com

 

[Cobie]

Umm No.
You need to acquaint yourself how the Supreme Court made clear in its unanimous 2021 NCAA v. Alston decision
In addition currently, six states have passed NIL legislation at the state level (California, Florida, Colorado, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Michigan) , As of mid-February, 39 states have passed, currently/previously proposed, or plan to propose NIL legislation, so assuming just one Governor is responsible is to be seriously misinformed.

Hello Harvard -

Thanks for your perspective, but I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Supreme Court’s NCAA v. Alston (in 2021) decision and the role of state legislation in the NIL landscape.

For starters, Alston was not an NIL case. The unanimous ruling addressed NCAA restrictions on education-related benefits (e.g., computers, internships), finding them in violation of antitrust law under the Sherman Act. It didn’t directly enable NIL, as the majority opinion never mentions “name, image, and likeness.” Kavanaugh’s concurrence raised concerns about broader NCAA rules (including NIL) but the decision itself focused narrowly on education benefits. The NCAA’s interim NIL policy came later and was driven with state laws. (not Alston)

Second, you’re correct that multiple states have passed or proposed NIL laws but this supports my point -- which is that the ill-conceived and disastrous "Fair Pay to Play Act", signed by Newsom in 2019, sparked a domino effect that forced the NCAA to relax its NIL restrictions when states like Florida set earlier effective dates. It was his law was the catalyst for the state-driven push that disrupted college sports’ amateur model. On top of this, he's a 5-star soulless idiot who has had the heaviest hand in ruining the great State of California over the past 25 years.

So it was government intervention, starting with Newsom’s legislation, which opened the door to NIL chaos and undermined the game’s integrity.

And there's zero surprise that the Billionaire Boy's Club Schools now want to hold on tight to the inequities established in its wake.

 

[Lurker123]

I still say the only real solution is going to have to come from the fans and the free market. When the fans of the 120 or so programs who don't have deep enough pockets to buy their way into the CFP with a reasonable chance of winning the championship decide to stop sending in money and buying tickets, those programs will have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to continue fielding a team in the top tier of college football. When there are only a couple dozen programs left competing, the tv money will dry up and then the system will fundamentally change.

Govt. intervention is only going to make things worse. The problems will change but the new problems will probably be worse than the current problems.

While what you say is true, I hold out little hope for it. There is a large percentage of collegebfootball fans that will still go to games, still go to bowls, etc. I dont see a boycott (for lack of a better word) taking enough of a hold.

 

[Cobie]

Saban sums it up rather well in his statement supporting the EO:

"I think we sort of need to make a decision here relative to—do we want to have an education-based model, which I think the President made a huge step toward doing that, or do we want to have universities sponsor professional teams? I think most people would choose the former."

These are the only two options. I would say at this point we are closer to, and there's a lot of momentum moving towards, universities sponsoring professional teams.

Nick Saban Opens Up About Donald Trump's College Sports Executive Order

The former Alabama head coach believes this is a 'huge step.'

www.si.com

The executive order is a short-term tactic to help bust the door open on actual legislation to this end.

They know exactly what they are doing.

States that challenge restoration of a level playing field will ultimately be exposed.

 

[Cobie]

I still say the only real solution is going to have to come from the fans and the free market. When the fans of the 120 or so programs who don't have deep enough pockets to buy their way into the CFP with a reasonable chance of winning the championship decide to stop sending in money and buying tickets, those programs will have to make a decision as to whether or not they want to continue fielding a team in the top tier of college football. When there are only a couple dozen programs left competing, the tv money will dry up and then the system will fundamentally change.

Govt. intervention is only going to make things worse. The problems will change but the new problems will probably be worse than the current problems.

It will never happen.

Most fans and students look at a football game as one big social gathering that they can attend in the Fall on Saturdays.

They could care less about a level playing field.

It might as well be the Kentucky Derby in their eyes.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

Hello Harvard -

Thanks for your perspective, but I believe you have a misunderstanding about the Supreme Court’s NCAA v. Alston (in 2021) decision and the role of state legislation in the NIL landscape.

For starters, Alston was not an NIL case. The unanimous ruling addressed NCAA restrictions on education-related benefits (e.g., computers, internships), finding them in violation of antitrust law under the Sherman Act. It didn’t directly enable NIL, as the majority opinion never mentions “name, image, and likeness.” Kavanaugh’s concurrence raised concerns about broader NCAA rules (including NIL) but the decision itself focused narrowly on education benefits. The NCAA’s interim NIL policy came later and was driven with state laws. (not Alston)

Second, you’re correct that multiple states have passed or proposed NIL laws but this supports my point -- which is that the ill-conceived and disastrous "Fair Pay to Play Act", signed by Newsom in 2019, sparked a domino effect that forced the NCAA to relax its NIL restrictions when states like Florida set earlier effective dates. It was his law was the catalyst for the state-driven push that disrupted college sports’ amateur model. On top of this, he's a 5-star soulless idiot who has had the heaviest hand in ruining the great State of California over the past 25 years.

So it was government intervention, starting with Newsom’s legislation, which opened the door to NIL chaos and undermined the game’s integrity.

And there's zero surprise that the Billionaire Boy's Club Schools now want to hold on tight to the inequities established in its wake.

You are correct that it did not directly mention NIL, however the court ruled that the NCAA's restrictions on education-related benefits for athletes violated federal antitrust laws, indirectly paving the way for athletes to profit from their NIL.

 

[Cobie]

You are correct that it did not directly mention NIL, however the court ruled that the NCAA's restrictions on education-related benefits for athletes violated federal antitrust laws, indirectly paving the way for athletes to profit from their NIL.

Yep -- but let’s not give the Supreme Court too much credit for the NIL gold rush. The real spark was California’s Fair Pay to Play Act in 2019, signed by Newsom, which set off a legislative wildfire across the states. {he seems to enjoy inducing wildfires.}

The antitrust jab at education benefits was more of a supporting act, not the headliner. The case was about laptops and internships, not the right to cash in on fame.

Your point about Alston’s ripple effect underscores why the Trump's executive order is swinging for the fences to rein in NIL chaos and protect the game’s soul....As discussed above, it’s more of a bold bunt—likely to get thrown out at the Supreme Court when schools like UT and Ohio State sue to protect their cash cows but it gets the ball rolling in the right direction and could force real change via Congressional action.

This is the only way out -- Government invention aimed at correcting lousy original government intervention.

 

[KingWard]

Government meddling is how it started.

Let's see if they can now unwind the misguided actions of Gavin Newsom and a crooked judge to salvage the integrity of the game.

I was thinking the compensation thing started when individuals enlisted the courts on behalf of player control of their NIL as a civil matter.

 

[Cobie]

I was thinking the compensation thing started when individuals enlisted the courts on behalf of player control of their NIL as a civil matter.

You're right that civil lawsuits like O’Bannon sparked the push for reasonable athlete compensation. Spurrier weighed in on matter a few times during that period.

But it was Newsom’s 2019 Fair Pay to Play Act leveraged that momentum to ignite a state-law frenzy --- creating an unregulated, “absurd” pay-for-play NIL market with now reportedly $35-40 million rosters. This made it difficult to unwind by design.

 

[KingWard]

You're right that civil lawsuits like O’Bannon sparked the push for reasonable athlete compensation. Spurrier weighed in on matter a few times during that period.

But it was Newsom’s 2019 Fair Pay to Play Act leveraged that momentum to ignite a state-law frenzy --- creating an unregulated, “absurd” pay-for-play NIL market with now reportedly $35-40 million rosters. This made it difficult to unwind by design.

He and "absurd" are an apt couple.

 

[Harvard Gamecock]

The executive order prohibits third-party, pay-for-play payments but “does not apply to legitimate, fair-market-value compensation that a third party provides to an athlete, such as for a brand endorsement,” according to the White House’s release. It is unknown what entity will have the authority to enforce the prohibition of third-party, pay-for-play payments included in Trump’s executive order."

If I'm reading this correctly, I'm not sure how this EO is going to have any effect on the runaway NIL issue.

 

[Cobie]

The executive order prohibits third-party, pay-for-play payments but “does not apply to legitimate, fair-market-value compensation that a third party provides to an athlete, such as for a brand endorsement,” according to the White House’s release. It is unknown what entity will have the authority to enforce the prohibition of third-party, pay-for-play payments included in Trump’s executive order."

If I'm reading this correctly, I'm not sure how this EO is going to have any effect on the runaway NIL issue.

It's a strategic play and fits his pattern of using executive power to shape narratives and force outcomes

He knows the executive order has a slim chance of surviving court challenges.

However, he’s doing it anyway to rally his base, push Congress, test the judiciary, score symbolic points, etc..

For example -- The order could pressure Congress to pass legislation like the SCORE Act, which would create a federal framework for NIL and antitrust exemptions.

A court loss might even hasten bipartisan support by exposing the need for clarity.

 

[Piscis]

It will never happen.

Most fans and students look at a football game as one big social gathering that they can attend in the Fall on Saturdays.

They could care less about a level playing field.

It might as well be the Kentucky Derby in their eyes.

"Never" is a long time. I don't think anything will change for the next 5 years or so but if college football continues to move away from the education model and more towards a professional football league with college naming rights, I think interest is going to fall off.

I agree that, right now, fans and students look at football as a fun time and social gathering in the Fall. I'm not sure they don't care about a level playing field. How many Carolina fans would continue to donate, buy tickets and spend hundreds of dollars each week on tailgating and travel if they knew in their heart that Carolina had absolutely no chance at competing for any kind of championship because they were at such a financial disadvantage? Some would keep spending because they enjoy the experience enough but a large percentage would find something else to do on Saturdays in the Fall. What happens when football programs across the country start charging many hundreds of dollars for a single game ticket combined with a requirement to donate thousands for the privilege of buying those tickets AND expect those ticket buyers to also contribute hundreds or thousands of dollars to an NIL collective? I already know people who have given up long held season tickets and stopped going to games because the cost has risen so much. They can still afford to go and buy the tickets but the cost/benefit equation doesn't work for them anymore. They pick one, maybe two games a season to go to and buy tickets on the secondary market and don't have to donate anything to the program or NIL.

The Kentucky Derby is an excellent example. I'd wager 90+% of the people watching the Derby never attend another horse race that year or many other years. The people who watch the Derby on tv overwhelmingly do not care about horse racing or any one horse. That particular race is the Super Bowl of horse racing and an opportunity to have a party to watch. I don't know anyone who has a Preakness or Belmont party. In the future, college football could go down the path where people watch on tv once or twice a season for a big game and don't pay any money to the actual program. Once fans stop attending in person, viewership at home drops off pretty quickly.

 

[Cobie]

"Never" is a long time. I don't think anything will change for the next 5 years or so but if college football continues to move away from the education model and more towards a professional football league with college naming rights, I think interest is going to fall off.

I agree that, right now, fans and students look at football as a fun time and social gathering in the Fall. I'm not sure they don't care about a level playing field. How many Carolina fans would continue to donate, buy tickets and spend hundreds of dollars each week on tailgating and travel if they knew in their heart that Carolina had absolutely no chance at competing for any kind of championship because they were at such a financial disadvantage? Some would keep spending because they enjoy the experience enough but a large percentage would find something else to do on Saturdays in the Fall. What happens when football programs across the country start charging many hundreds of dollars for a single game ticket combined with a requirement to donate thousands for the privilege of buying those tickets AND expect those ticket buyers to also contribute hundreds or thousands of dollars to an NIL collective? I already know people who have given up long held season tickets and stopped going to games because the cost has risen so much. They can still afford to go and buy the tickets but the cost/benefit equation doesn't work for them anymore. They pick one, maybe two games a season to go to and buy tickets on the secondary market and don't have to donate anything to the program or NIL.

The Kentucky Derby is an excellent example. I'd wager 90+% of the people watching the Derby never attend another horse race that year or many other years. The people who watch the Derby on tv overwhelmingly do not care about horse racing or any one horse. That particular race is the Super Bowl of horse racing and an opportunity to have a party to watch. I don't know anyone who has a Preakness or Belmont party. In the future, college football could go down the path where people watch on tv once or twice a season for a big game and don't pay any money to the actual program. Once fans stop attending in person, viewership at home drops off pretty quickly.

I would have thought there would have been more of a rebellion about the ridiculous NIL system as it stands today than we've seen so far. Most college football fans either don't care or don't understand what's really going on I guess. If it had gone into existence before everyone's attention span went to zero (Cells, etc.), you probably would have seen major articles in major publications regularly denouncing the model. That's not the case today.

In terms of a timeline, I would bet colleges themselves will become virtually obsolete before fans stop going (and contributing) to games. We're maybe 3-5 years out from a complete AI takeover. If I was an 18 year old today, I'd learn AI/AGI and how to prompt and leave the book learning to others. You can start out at $500K+ if you know what you're doing and are interested in a corporate position. Otherwise, you can start businesses in a heartbeat and make that in a month within the first 8-12 months of startup. We're about to go from humans back to chimps in the universe pecking order. This rubs directly against the current University Learning Model and I'm certain they are sacred to death. Luckily, most of them have massive endownments to endure and diagnose where to go from here.

 

[Piscis]

I would have thought there would have been more of a rebellion about the ridiculous NIL system as it stands today than we've seen so far. Most college football fans either don't care or don't understand what's really going on I guess. If it had gone into existence before everyone's attention span went to zero (Cells, etc.), you probably would have seen major articles in major publications regularly denouncing the model. That's not the case today.

In terms of a timeline, I would bet colleges themselves will become virtually obsolete before fans stop going (and contributing) to games. We're maybe 3-5 years out from a complete AI takeover. If I was an 18 year old today, I'd learn AI/AGI and how to prompt and leave the book learning to others. You can start out at $500K+ if you know what you're doing and are interested in a corporate position. Otherwise, you can start businesses in a heartbeat and make that in a month within the first 8-12 months of startup. We're about to go from humans back to chimps in the universe pecking order. This rubs directly against the current University Learning Model and I'm certain they are sacred to death. Luckily, most of them have massive endownments to endure and diagnose where to go from here.

If I were an 18 yr old guy, I'd learn HVAC, plumbing or electrical and get my license. AI is never going to be able to do that kind of work. A young man can learn the trade, spend 20 or so years learning the business while working for someone and then open his own shop and, if he runs it like a business and pays attention to the actual business side of things, can make doctor money.

I had a client in yesterday who has a contracting business that does interior remodeling of medical administrative offices in hospitals. He basically goes in and changes flooring, paints, does sheetrock work and interior trim and cabinets. He acts as a general contractor and subcontracts all of the actual work. He runs the business side of things and schedules the work with a partner. He is 50 now, has been doing this for 25 years and is on track to retire very comfortably in 5 more years. I was thinking about how I would love to thought to start such a business when I was in my mid to late 20s.

 

[Cobie]

If I were an 18 yr old guy, I'd learn HVAC, plumbing or electrical and get my license. AI is never going to be able to do that kind of work. A young man can learn the trade, spend 20 or so years learning the business while working for someone and then open his own shop and, if he runs it like a business and pays attention to the actual business side of things, can make doctor money.

I had a client in yesterday who has a contracting business that does interior remodeling of medical administrative offices in hospitals. He basically goes in and changes flooring, paints, does sheetrock work and interior trim and cabinets. He acts as a general contractor and subcontracts all of the actual work. He runs the business side of things and schedules the work with a partner. He is 50 now, has been doing this for 25 years and is on track to retire very comfortably in 5 more years. I was thinking about how I would love to thought to start such a business when I was in my mid to late 20s.

You're probably right on that. Home and business robots are almost here, but it's probably going to take some time for them to get that intuitive at those skills. And if they do, we're probably toast anyway.