Miami coach Jim Larranaga retires mid season. Cites NIL
- Thread starter JimStarr777
- Start date
Ridiculous. Even pro leagues have things like salary caps, the first few years in the NFL you can only get a limited salary....
The NFL’s rookie wage scale, explained
How rich do rookies get off their first NFL contract? Not very.
www.sbnation.com
....plus you don't have agent fees (as far as I know, maybe that has changed now) and don't have NFL Union dues (which are high!).
The college game right now seems much more libertarian "anything goes" than any pro league.
Last edited:
They have salary caps and rookie pay scale because they negotiated that in collective bargaining.Ridiculous. Even pro leagues have things like salary caps, the first few years in the NFL you can only get a limited salary....
The NFL’s rookie wage scale, explained
How rich do rookies get off their first NFL contract? Not very.
....plus you don't have agent fees (as far as I know, maybe that has changed now) and don't have NFL Union dues (which are high!).
The college game right now seems much more libertarian "anything goes" than any pro league.
It is just what the college landscape is right now. What we WANT to see has nothing to do with it
But, JimStarr, what “I/you/we really want the college athletic landscape to be” is not the right prism to view this discussion.
For a long, long time, college sports has been a BIG business with either unpaid labor or a “salary cap” (as someone recently suggested), via the value of a scholarship.
Some people, not me, complained, “but they are getting a college education.” But, as is obvious to everyone now…and most then, that college education was a gross underpayment for the services rendered by a good number of those player/employees.
You may wish to pine for the good old days. But, please, the blame (if one thinks of it as blame) does not rest with the players finally getting theirs. It rests with University administrators who long ago decided college sports were big business and made thousands of decisions in that direction…long before there was a willingness to pay players.
Multi-millionaire, fully grown adult, Coach Larranaga quitting on his team mid-season deserves vastly more opprobrium than we would give a 20-year old doing the same thing.
Last edited:
Imagine a high school. They have a football team. Students at that school play for the football team because it is fun.
The local tv station says "We will pay you $10 million for the broadcast rights for your games."
What happens next?
The local tv station says "We will pay you $10 million for the broadcast rights for your games."
What happens next?
Good question. It's a bit of a different situation as the high school players are children, and we don't know if the money goes to the school district or to an athletic department fiefdom, but it not out of the question to ask if the players should get a share.
Long time Florida State coach Leonard Hamilton being sued by a bunch of players on last year's team for allegedly reneging on 250-thousand dollar NIL promise to each of them. What a can of worms this has become.
We actually have too MANY regulations in college football in that what few regulations we do have make the problem significantly worse, as is usually the case with regulations.
Because one of the only existing rules around compensation is a ban on explicit inducement, schools and players are forbidden from seeking multi-year commitments from each other. It players were allowed to commit for multi-year deals it would lessen some of the transfer chaos, especially the in-season stuff. Instead, this is regulated away so it remains very chaotic.
Yes, should be changed to “obvious to anyone that has followed the trajectory of college football for the last three decades”.
I think the administrators and faculty immediately give themselves raises (if they can) and spend the money on athletic equipment and facilities, then distribute whats left to other programs in the school.
I would've played football for a free education. And the revenue sports pay for opportunities in the non-revenue sports, something the NFL and NBA don't do. What is the mission of a school?
Here’s the thing, you weren’t good enough to be asked to play for the school. Secondly, the TV networks were not paying enormous sums of money to watch the likes of you and I playing each weekend. There is literally no return for the schools investment on us.
As a former D1 non-revenue athlete, I am well aware that revenue sports pay for all other sports including the entirety of the Women’s athletics program in most schools. I also watched many men’s non-revenue sports being dismantled in the name of Title IX. Yet, money kept rolling in to schools on the back of basically two programs. It was never going to be sustainable and the fact that the Greedy University Administrators held on as long as possible eventually backfired and led us to where we are today. Labor ain’t free and this is capitalism, at its best and at its worst.
Jim Laranaga received a huge new contract after GMU's unexpected run to the Final Four. GMU dissolved their nationally competitive track program to pay for the contract. I dislike NIL but JL does not get my sympathy
You sure about the dissolution of the GMU track program?
You can see both the men’s and women’s team at the VCU invitational on January 12.
Walt Bannerman Named All-American at NCAA Championships - George Mason University Athletics
Fairfax, Va.- Walt Bannerman concludes his season at a high level achieving the title as All-American with a new PR of 5.37m at the NCAA Championships. An excellent
gomason.com
you can argue that there are too many regulations (4 years of eligibility in 5 for example) but the two most impactful regulations are gone: transfer rule and NIL allow players to come and go and earn more than just free tuition. Also, players can enter into long term agreements with third parties but not the school. I am confident that will change when the athletes are designated as employees and can unionize and bargain collectively.
??? He was getting a free education, free board, free food/nutritional guidance, free clothes. He got plenty. He was selfish and wanted the farm when essentially he had an internship (CFB). We all had unpaid internships and it didn’t hurt us at all. I’m sorry he’s had some issues post-football but perhaps if he spent less time on the sideshow he would have made a better network that could have supported him through those tribulations.
The only line that I can tolerate in this post. The rest is so, so misguided. Do you ever consider that someone might intend for his extra efforts to help others, thus making the efforts much more worthwhile?
Colter was the Curt Flood of college football. He lost the battle because he was ahead if his time, but his efforts opened eyes and opened minds leading to long overdue changes.
My mind is still closed, and I'm kicking and screaming every step of the way.
Curt Flood was in the major leagues for 12 years and was essentially the property of his team, the Cardinals, until they released him or traded him. This was due to baseball's "reserve clause" a contractual restriction that first appeared in some National League contracts in 1879 (16 years after slavery was abolished).
In 1968, the professional ballplayer had no negotiating power whatsoever. His salary was at the discretion of his employer. The only limit on the employer was that the player's new salary could not be lower than his previous salary. All the players could do to negotiate was to sit out and not get paid. The Cardinals traded Flood to Philadelphia and Flood refused to report. He sued baseball and lost.
Kain Colter sought to have college football players classified as employees in order to unionize.
Flood's case is a lot easier to rally behind - because the injustice is obvious.
In 1968, the professional ballplayer had no negotiating power whatsoever. His salary was at the discretion of his employer. The only limit on the employer was that the player's new salary could not be lower than his previous salary. All the players could do to negotiate was to sit out and not get paid. The Cardinals traded Flood to Philadelphia and Flood refused to report. He sued baseball and lost.
Kain Colter sought to have college football players classified as employees in order to unionize.
Flood's case is a lot easier to rally behind - because the injustice is obvious.
Kain Colter was *also* the property of his school. His only leverage was *also* to sit out a year — to transfer, if they’d let him.
He would never ever get paid — and, despite that obvious injustice — didn’t even ask to get paid. He was asking that scholarships cover all living expenses, and that medical coverage be guaranteed beyond college.
Imagine if Kain Colter’s concussion-addled brain had gotten proper medical care. Certainly, after the joy he brought Wildcat fans, he deserved the psychiatric help he so clearly needed.
NU could afford to pay Pat Fitzgerald millions, could fundraise to build a palace on the lakefront, but couldn’t ensure that students getting a “free ride” actually got a free ride — while requiring many more than 40 hours per week.
The only reason one thinks that Flood’s injustice was obvious while Colter’s was not is because Flood’s was 50 years ago and Colter’s was recent.
The injustice faced by Colter and the Cats players was obvious.
And the NCAA is so incompetent that its chosen middle men and oral contracts and complete shadiness. Still.
I was getting ready to respond, but this says it as well or better than anything I could have said.
I'm sure you would agree that I didn't state an opinion on Colter's "injustice."
I was comparing Colter's situation and what he sought to Flood's situation and what he sought.
But Colter was not the property of Northwestern. He was a college student-athlete who made an agreement with a University to attend classes for free, with free room and board and any other benefits he might receive in exchange for representing that university as an athlete.
Flood, on the other hand, was a paid professional who could not work for anyone other than the team that originally signed a contract with him - in perpetuity.
So you can throw as many smokescreens up as you want (NCAA, Fitzgerald, etc) but the two situations are very different.
They were the same things.
There was a one-sided contract that was the only option if either wanted to play the next level of sport. Colter and Flood both fought so that the contract they were forced to sign as their only way in was more equitable.
The only difference is that college football in 2014 was infinitely more profitable than Major League Baseball in 1970.
Curt Flood was, of course, wildly unpopular for his stance. Hayes. The degree to which his case was unassailable is only due to time.
(Rhetorically, you stated that Flood’s case was obvious and left Colter’s case unmentioned — the implication being that his case wasn’t obvious.)
Last edited:
The right to contract - an American labor history perennial. If I were writing a book about the history of sports compensation and labor relations, I would have chapters about each of Flood and Colter. Similarities and differences. Parenthetically, I was gifted a Colter autographed football by a labor organization I was able to help out years ago.
My personal view, I liked the game (both college football and major league baseball) better before players had so much freedom of movement, but I also am convinced that the guys doing the heavy lifting, and sometimes sacrificing health, have deserved a larger share of the revenues they play such a role in generating and should have as much choice as possible in where they play/work.
Exactly. I like the games better myself with less player movement. I also understand that what I like should not take precedence over another individuals freedom to make a living as he/she sees fit.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Brendan Sullivan CHOKE JOB at the Music City Bowl- Latest: EvanstonCat