The 2011 Thread

[IGNORE2]

So, I had a few thoughts that fell OT on a previous thread and I'm posting here in hopes of an interesting discussion:

I think athletes are tremendously exploited from image rights to compensation and long term injury protection. I would really like to see NCAA revenue become an open book with schools required to reinvest a certain percentage into the athletes benefits - similar to a salary floor. I would like to see lower salaries and expenses within the NCAA. Pay coaches whatever you want - but for the schools to spend a significant percentage of all sport related revenue on the athletes - current and past. That might help motivate the schools to control costs - like coaching salaries - if so much revenue is untouchable. Or make it a conference or NCAA process and redirect the revenue from that point before distributing to the schools. Conference level probably makes the most sense - and has the most power to even out the revenue among their members and pay out benefits for all scholarship-ed athletes (disability insurance, long term health, stipends, etc.) in a pension like fashion as well as to the current student. The more I think about the pension comparison - the more I like it.

I also think that the athlete should retain no less than equal rights to his name and image. And I think the athlete should be free to pursue and accept endorsements, but only after one full year in a program. (As aside, I would like to see the NCAA ban freshmen play - especially in basketball. In addition to taking a step towards returning the notion of STUDENT athlete, I think a year off the field has all pluses - growth, academic scrutiny, practice time, more upperclassmen on the field and in the drafts. In basketball, these one and dones have watered down the NBA, the draft, and lead to lots of flame out high draft picks...) Of course, shoe endorsements and such would fall second to the team's official uniform, but if the athlete wants to promote Chevy, then good for him/her. I realize this creates the opportunity for improper recruiting, but that is the NCAA's purpose to investigate. I also don't think the endorsement can include donning the school uniform or school name - but if Joe Athlete has a marketable Q rating, have at it.

 

[Gladeskat]

This thread is no fun.

 

[thewildcat2011]

So, I had a few thoughts that fell OT on a previous thread and I'm posting here in hopes of an interesting discussion:

I think athletes are tremendously exploited from image rights to compensation and long term injury protection. I would really like to see NCAA revenue become an open book with schools required to reinvest a certain percentage into the athletes benefits - similar to a salary floor. I would like to see lower salaries and expenses within the NCAA. Pay coaches whatever you want - but for the schools to spend a significant percentage of all sport related revenue on the athletes - current and past. That might help motivate the schools to control costs - like coaching salaries - if so much revenue is untouchable. Or make it a conference or NCAA process and redirect the revenue from that point before distributing to the schools. Conference level probably makes the most sense - and has the most power to even out the revenue among their members and pay out benefits for all scholarship-ed athletes (disability insurance, long term health, stipends, etc.) in a pension like fashion as well as to the current student. The more I think about the pension comparison - the more I like it.

I also think that the athlete should retain no less than equal rights to his name and image. And I think the athlete should be free to pursue and accept endorsements, but only after one full year in a program. (As aside, I would like to see the NCAA ban freshmen play - especially in basketball. In addition to taking a step towards returning the notion of STUDENT athlete, I think a year off the field has all pluses - growth, academic scrutiny, practice time, more upperclassmen on the field and in the drafts. In basketball, these one and dones have watered down the NBA, the draft, and lead to lots of flame out high draft picks...) Of course, shoe endorsements and such would fall second to the team's official uniform, but if the athlete wants to promote Chevy, then good for him/her. I realize this creates the opportunity for improper recruiting, but that is the NCAA's purpose to investigate. I also don't think the endorsement can include donning the school uniform or school name - but if Joe Athlete has a marketable Q rating, have at it.

I agree.

I struggle with how exactly to build a system that minimizes improper benefits and recruiting promises while also allowing athletes to capitalize on their rightful image rights.

 

[VirginiaWildcat]

I agree.

I struggle with how exactly to build a system that minimizes improper benefits and recruiting promises while also allowing athletes to capitalize on their rightful image rights.

Step 1: Actually penalize the institutions that deserve it for egregious reasons (ie North Carolina).

PS: Love that they had their hearts torn out in the championship game....stupid cheaters.

 

[docrugby1]

Long term medical benefits is something to investigate. A student athlete should have an "exit" physical with all injuries documented, much like in the military. Schools should fund a program to cover related medical problems that develop down the road. I only believe treatment costs should be covered and not financial damages

Covering the cost of a total knee 20 years after a sports related and documented meniscal or ligament injury could be done . The fund would fail if lawyers were allowed to sue for economic damages , for example, my NFL career was shortened by 4 years-pay me $20 million.

The fund would have to be administered by the equivalence of an arbitration board and not subject to the whims of our court system. If a student athlete files for assistance he must forgo claims for economic benefits.

 

[IGNORE2]

It's a start. I could accept that premise to build around.

 

[Hungry Jack]

This thread is no fun.

Have nothing and like it.

 

[willycat]

Long term medical benefits is something to investigate. A student athlete should have an "exit" physical with all injuries documented, much like in the military. Schools should fund a program to cover related medical problems that develop down the road. I only believe treatment costs should be covered and not financial damages

Covering the cost of a total knee 20 years after a sports related and documented meniscal or ligament injury could be done . The fund would fail if lawyers were allowed to sue for economic damages , for example, my NFL career was shortened by 4 years-pay me $20 million.

The fund would have to be administered by the equivalence of an arbitration board and not subject to the whims of our court system. If a student athlete files for assistance he must forgo claims for economic benefits.

Agree that your proposal is a good place to start and that it was one of many things Colter was advocating for.

 

[IGNORE2]

Agree that your proposal is a good place to start and that it was one of many things Colter was advocating for.

For all the grief about the Colter thing, we lost the bigger question: is the status quo where we should be? I cannot imagine many people outside the NCAA offices and equivalent in the school and conference offices feeling so. Therefore, what will be done and when? Colter got crushed and I haven't heard about any more changes rolling out to benefit the student athletes. Simply starting with continuing medical care paid through the billions in NCAA sports related revenue would at the very least show some human concern for the students being valued more than a simple commodity.

I also thought Johnny Football was going to press the issue on marketing rights - but the NCAA pussed out of that one. I would expect more high profile atheletes to break the rules more and more flagrantly until the matter is finally addressed.

 

[GOUNUII]

So, I had a few thoughts that fell OT on a previous thread and I'm posting here in hopes of an interesting discussion:

I think athletes are tremendously exploited from image rights to compensation and long term injury protection. I would really like to see NCAA revenue become an open book with schools required to reinvest a certain percentage into the athletes benefits - similar to a salary floor. I would like to see lower salaries and expenses within the NCAA. Pay coaches whatever you want - but for the schools to spend a significant percentage of all sport related revenue on the athletes - current and past. That might help motivate the schools to control costs - like coaching salaries - if so much revenue is untouchable. Or make it a conference or NCAA process and redirect the revenue from that point before distributing to the schools. Conference level probably makes the most sense - and has the most power to even out the revenue among their members and pay out benefits for all scholarship-ed athletes (disability insurance, long term health, stipends, etc.) in a pension like fashion as well as to the current student. The more I think about the pension comparison - the more I like it.

I also think that the athlete should retain no less than equal rights to his name and image. And I think the athlete should be free to pursue and accept endorsements, but only after one full year in a program. (As aside, I would like to see the NCAA ban freshmen play - especially in basketball. In addition to taking a step towards returning the notion of STUDENT athlete, I think a year off the field has all pluses - growth, academic scrutiny, practice time, more upperclassmen on the field and in the drafts. In basketball, these one and dones have watered down the NBA, the draft, and lead to lots of flame out high draft picks...) Of course, shoe endorsements and such would fall second to the team's official uniform, but if the athlete wants to promote Chevy, then good for him/her. I realize this creates the opportunity for improper recruiting, but that is the NCAA's purpose to investigate. I also don't think the endorsement can include donning the school uniform or school name - but if Joe Athlete has a marketable Q rating, have at it.

You lost me at "tremendously exploited." NU football players receive well over a half million dollars in goods and services over the course of a 4 year scholarship. And the degree they receive keeps on paying them thereafter. I am all for the expansion of medical benefits . Unfortunately, any formal benefit program will undoubtedly lead to endless litigation on a variety of issues. That's not a great reason to short players and their families. Just a cautionary note that payors and payees in any medical benefit program often disagree.

GOUNUII

 

[IGNORE2]

Half million at NU, true. That is a small example - and the rules have to apply across the board. Not sure what four years at Northern runs these days - for instate. Plus, I would contend benefits should run evenly across all revenue generating sports.

But let's take your version, what is a half million worth:

- assume no athletic negligence, simple medical condition brought to a head through athletic pursuit - is it worth a life (Wheeler)
- CBE and related problems - a possibility for Ellis and many, many others
- any mental ramifications - Schwaba

These are just a couple recent and well known cases. Glades - how are you knees, your back, your neck? Matt - how are you feeling these days as you turn the corner of middle age? Anybody know if Eschmeyer walks upright anymore?

The common fact is that the various institutions involved made money throughout this time frame - just like the NFL and NBA. But they relied on STUDENT athletes, right? Not pros, not employees. I find that unfair. Many people made six and seven digit incomes through their employment with the schools, conferences and NCAA and became wealthy with nice retirement benefits. But the ones that drove that revenue - most received only an education and a significant number did so at a cost in human flesh. Often a delayed cost unknown by the young, uneducated and unrepresented participant. (Can you imagine how the landscape would change if student athletes had representation? By adults with education and knowledge related to the risks and rewards involved - not parents that are often equally or less educated as the athlete.)

My non revenue sports days have led to some arthritic aches occasionally. Hardly anything worth noting in my relatively young 45 year old body. But it makes me wonder how a 45 year oldt will feel, or a 45 year Glades felt. The degenerative condition in their spines are largely due to their playing days. If nothing else, their medical should be covered. Without deductibles, co pays or questions.

 

[YesterdaysCat]

Long term medical benefits is something to investigate. A student athlete should have an "exit" physical with all injuries documented, much like in the military. Schools should fund a program to cover related medical problems that develop down the road. I only believe treatment costs should be covered and not financial damages

Covering the cost of a total knee 20 years after a sports related and documented meniscal or ligament injury could be done . The fund would fail if lawyers were allowed to sue for economic damages , for example, my NFL career was shortened by 4 years-pay me $20 million.

The fund would have to be administered by the equivalence of an arbitration board and not subject to the whims of our court system. If a student athlete files for assistance he must forgo claims for economic benefits.

I'm confident that long term medical benefits for hundreds of thousands of athletes would eventually put the athletic departments in the same situation as our state governments are in with workers' pension plans.

The real solution is returning all sports to recreational status, but we know there's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

 

[willycat]

I'm confident that long term medical benefits for hundreds of thousands of athletes would eventually put the athletic departments in the same situation as our state governments are in with workers' pension plans.

The real solution is returning all sports to recreational status, but we know there's no putting that genie back in the bottle.

Sorry but you are comparing apples to oranges. Workers pension plans are promised compensation for doing assigned work and paid in part by the worker. Those agreements are protected by the state constitution and cannot be changed. The NCAA could easily pay medical expenses for an injured atlethe because of all the cash they receive from TV contracts and such. You and others keep harping back to the cost of a schlorship these atlethes receive but I like to note a couple of things from an article that Rick Telander penned a few years back. He stated that the actual cost of an athletic schlorship was far less then reported. Made the point that the buildings and classrooms were already built and likely paid for so if a player was attending the cost would just include another chair and some books. Also said that the professors were under contract and paid, whether they taught 30 or 31 students. Additional costs, except for dorms and food are the choice of a individual school, from coaches outrageous salaries and unnecessary, glamorous facilities. So the $65,000 yearly schlorship costs is not $65,000, probably less then half of that.

 

[spartcat]

Compensation for athletes makes little sense unless athletes are actively discouraged from attaining a degree. Not only do full scholarship students of any sort at any school receive a relatively valuable product for free, if they do graduate they have at least the average gain of $20,000+ per year for the rest of their lives over H.S. graduates. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77
(that's just for young adults. The income premium grows over time). There is also better evidence as of the last few years that students at "elite" schools do better financially than others, all else equal. In other words, many or most of these people are students, as we (nearly) all were, and receive lifetime benefits from being so.

Video game images are issues for a few superstars from a few schools, but it's hard to figure how these few are hurt in the long run by not getting rich as college students, or how one deals with the revenue value of a few relatively random short term college superstars in a systematic way. It's also hard to make a case that "revenue sport" athletes (all of whom are men) could be treated differently as individuals without creating other problems of fairness. I recommend taking their free $60k plus of education, books, per diems, food, etc. and enjoying their time here.

The exit medical checkup with some future coverage might make sense. However. I would consider means testing the benefits so that well-off former athletes pay more than those who don't benefit as much from their time in school. Either that or include a relatively high deductible so the compensation isn't provided to relatively minor cases. It might be worth thinking about options like that.

 

[willycat]

Compensation for athletes makes little sense unless athletes are actively discouraged from attaining a degree. Not only do full scholarship students of any sort at any school receive a relatively valuable product for free, if they do graduate they have at least the average gain of $20,000+ per year for the rest of their lives over H.S. graduates. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=77
(that's just for young adults. The income premium grows over time). There is also better evidence as of the last few years that students at "elite" schools do better financially than others, all else equal. In other words, many or most of these people are students, as we (nearly) all were, and receive lifetime benefits from being so.

Video game images are issues for a few superstars from a few schools, but it's hard to figure how these few are hurt in the long run by not getting rich as college students, or how one deals with the revenue value of a few relatively random short term college superstars in a systematic way. It's also hard to make a case that "revenue sport" athletes (all of whom are men) could be treated differently as individuals without creating other problems of fairness. I recommend taking their free $60k plus of education, books, per diems, food, etc. and enjoying their time here.

The exit medical checkup with some future coverage might make sense. However. I would consider means testing the benefits so that well-off former athletes pay more than those who don't benefit as much from their time in school. Either that or include a relatively high deductible so the compensation isn't provided to relatively minor cases. It might be worth thinking about options like that.

As stated the actual cost of a athletic schlorship is far less then $60,000. If you don't think that college players should reap the benefits of their work, then who should? coaches? administrators? the university?

 

[IGNORE2]

As stated the actual cost of a athletic schlorship is far less then $60,000. If you don't think that college players should reap the benefits of their work, then who should? coaches? administrators? the university?

This.

Two ways to look - from whether the kids deserve anything, whether the people on the school side deserve anything.

We often see the argument that coaches get paid what the market affords. In part, because with low costs associated to unpaid labor, money is bountiful. Would it be a problem for coaches, administrators, other athletic related staff to get paid in line with the equivalent of the average university employee. Perhaps that leftover money is then redirected to provide additional benefits for these athletes. If the lowest pay for a pro is hundreds of thousands, then isn't tens of thousands acceptable for the college level?

Cost of education v price of education v value of education is highly debatable, especially outside NU and other similar schools. But all of them have coaches and athletic staff earning well above the equivalent tenured academic staff member. If your response is free market, then if the athletes bound together to create their own impact on supply and demand in that free market, could you fault them. Isn't that a version of what Colter was attempting to do?

But I really think we are getting away from the simple, basic approach. Ideally, we wanted a system of amateur athletes to entertain us and represent their school. And as our knowledge base has grown, society become more sophisticated and medicine more informed - some found ways to grown rich from this program, we learned these kids are under compensated when compared, in scale, to their professional counterparts and, most importantly, many suffer injuries later in life as a result. So, if we didn't intend the first part, don't care about the second part, aren't we compassionate enough as a society to look for a way to use the natural revenue created to relieve the third part - with any potential error in favor of those kids?

 

[willycat]

This.

Two ways to look - from whether the kids deserve anything, whether the people on the school side deserve anything.

We often see the argument that coaches get paid what the market affords. In part, because with low costs associated to unpaid labor, money is bountiful. Would it be a problem for coaches, administrators, other athletic related staff to get paid in line with the equivalent of the average university employee. Perhaps that leftover money is then redirected to provide additional benefits for these athletes. If the lowest pay for a pro is hundreds of thousands, then isn't tens of thousands acceptable for the college level?

Cost of education v price of education v value of education is highly debatable, especially outside NU and other similar schools. But all of them have coaches and athletic staff earning well above the equivalent tenured academic staff member. If your response is free market, then if the athletes bound together to create their own impact on supply and demand in that free market, could you fault them. Isn't that a version of what Colter was attempting to do?

But I really think we are getting away from the simple, basic approach. Ideally, we wanted a system of amateur athletes to entertain us and represent their school. And as our knowledge base has grown, society become more sophisticated and medicine more informed - some found ways to grown rich from this program, we learned these kids are under compensated when compared, in scale, to their professional counterparts and, most importantly, many suffer injuries later in life as a result. So, if we didn't intend the first part, don't care about the second part, aren't we compassionate enough as a society to look for a way to use the natural revenue created to relieve the third part - with any potential error in favor of those kids?

+ 1,000!