The looming NIL thing...

[Sheffielder]

Wisconsin QB in the headlines today for creating a trademarked logo featuring his initials. From a CBS article: "Wisconsin announced earlier this month that it has partnered with Opendorse to launch the YouDub program, which is designed to help players capitalize on their name, image and likeness. The program is designed to help student-athlete assessment, education and brand development. Those include seminars with industry leaders in brand development, financial literacy and social media monetization."

This is...gross.

Within the next 2-3 years, a part of recruiting will be graphics on TikTok displaying the average earnings of starting players. Children in high school will have agents as gatekeepers negotiating meetings between them and actual head coaches trying to recruit them, and "runners" will become as prevalent as they already are in the lost cause of college basketball. Additional staff will be added to programs to manage this aspect of the "game."

In short, even the most basic illusions of college being different from the pros will be gone.

For fans of pro sports I don't think this transition is that big of a deal - but for myself, I've always held on to a little stitch of "purity" in college football. Northwestern as a program has certainly enabled this for me/us more than our friends who root for an Ohio State or an Alabama, but now it's open season, and we would be foolish to not leverage our alumni network, wealth, and other resources to compete alongside our peers and do all we can to make our sophomore linebacker a "top earner." Kids will transfer from one program to another because "it's a business decision for my family, and I need to be somewhere the fan base will be more 'supportive.'"

I guess it was inevitable. The transfer portal has already gradually made college football look more and more like the NFL free agency - players moving from one team to another over the slightest hint of adversity or lack of playing time. NCAA held back for too long to enable this to become a gradual, evolutionary process, and now the floodgates are gonna open so hard and fast we will all drown.

To be clear, I'm not saying players weren't/aren't owed. They've been taken advantage for too long. But it's obvious how tacky this is going to become and how quickly, and it just makes me sad.

 

[willycat]

Wisconsin QB in the headlines today for creating a trademarked logo featuring his initials. From a CBS article: "Wisconsin announced earlier this month that it has partnered with Opendorse to launch the YouDub program, which is designed to help players capitalize on their name, image and likeness. The program is designed to help student-athlete assessment, education and brand development. Those include seminars with industry leaders in brand development, financial literacy and social media monetization."

This is...gross.

Within the next 2-3 years, a part of recruiting will be graphics on TikTok displaying the average earnings of starting players. Children in high school will have agents as gatekeepers negotiating meetings between them and actual head coaches trying to recruit them, and "runners" will become as prevalent as they already are in the lost cause of college basketball. Additional staff will be added to programs to manage this aspect of the "game."

In short, even the most basic illusions of college being different from the pros will be gone.

For fans of pro sports I don't think this transition is that big of a deal - but for myself, I've always held on to a little stitch of "purity" in college football. Northwestern as a program has certainly enabled this for me/us more than our friends who root for an Ohio State or an Alabama, but now it's open season, and we would be foolish to not leverage our alumni network, wealth, and other resources to compete alongside our peers and do all we can to make our sophomore linebacker a "top earner." Kids will transfer from one program to another because "it's a business decision for my family, and I need to be somewhere the fan base will be more 'supportive.'"

I guess it was inevitable. The transfer portal has already gradually made college football look more and more like the NFL free agency - players moving from one team to another over the slightest hint of adversity or lack of playing time. NCAA held back for too long to enable this to become a gradual, evolutionary process, and now the floodgates are gonna open so hard and fast we will all drown.

To be clear, I'm not saying players weren't/aren't owed. They've been taken advantage for too long. But it's obvious how tacky this is going to become and how quickly, and it just makes me sad.

How would you suggest that the workers be compensated?

 

[FeralFelidae]

How would you suggest that the workers be compensated?

Tuition and books?

 

[Sheffielder]

How would you suggest that the workers be compensated?

Well for starters, if common sense would have been applied to this issue 10 years ago we could have awarded all student athletes a scholarship for the full Cost of Attendance (COA), which then would have included an actual dollar amount for "reasonable living expenses during the academic school year." In most cases this would have been around $3,000 per student (varies based on locale)...but the NCAA said that would be too costly for smaller schools and stuck strictly with tuition/room/board/books/fees.

Could have also allowed students to accept gifts up to a nominal amount, so if someone wanted to take a player out for pizza and beers on some random Tuesday night...it would have been permissible.

Other possibilities: a health insurance trust for players through the age of X, full tuition coverage for graduate study, or tuition benefits for immediate family (not unlike the GI Bill), funding/support services for families of players, aggregated commercial opportunities (i.e. all players get compensated equally for their likenesses appearing in video games)...so many possibilities if the NCAA hadn't acted like a gaggle of privileged jackasses who didn't have to answer to anyone on this issue.

None of these things would have compared to the windfall that's about to happen, but good-faith efforts to provide more/better compensation to players, many of whom straight up don't care about their education, perhaps would have kept state governments out of the conversation or stopped this (or at least delayed it) from becoming the circus it is about to become. If you thought hat dances for recruits were bad...ain't seen nothin yet.

 

[PURPLE Book Cat]

Even at Michigan the NIL value of a top D Tackle or cornerback won’t likely match any flashy RB, QB or WR. So while the Michigan’s of the world can splash a few names, Northwestern can raise the floor by leveraging value for all players via internships in Chicago. Performance and payments for a few versus opportunities for all.

 

[StreamCat]

Well for starters, if common sense would have been applied to this issue 10 years ago we could have awarded all student athletes a scholarship for the full Cost of Attendance (COA), which then would have included an actual dollar amount for "reasonable living expenses during the academic school year." In most cases this would have been around $3,000 per student (varies based on locale)...but the NCAA said that would be too costly for smaller schools and stuck strictly with tuition/room/board/books/fees.

Could have also allowed students to accept gifts up to a nominal amount, so if someone wanted to take a player out for pizza and beers on some random Tuesday night...it would have been permissible.

Other possibilities: a health insurance trust for players through the age of X, full tuition coverage for graduate study, or tuition benefits for immediate family (not unlike the GI Bill), funding/support services for families of players, aggregated commercial opportunities (i.e. all players get compensated equally for their likenesses appearing in video games)...so many possibilities if the NCAA hadn't acted like a gaggle of privileged jackasses who didn't have to answer to anyone on this issue.

None of these things would have compared to the windfall that's about to happen, but good-faith efforts to provide more/better compensation to players, many of whom straight up don't care about their education, perhaps would have kept state governments out of the conversation or stopped this (or at least delayed it) from becoming the circus it is about to become. If you thought hat dances for recruits were bad...ain't seen nothin yet.

Five-year scholarships whether a student red-shirts or not.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Well for starters, if common sense would have been applied to this issue 10 years ago we could have awarded all student athletes a scholarship for the full Cost of Attendance (COA), which then would have included an actual dollar amount for "reasonable living expenses during the academic school year." In most cases this would have been around $3,000 per student (varies based on locale)...but the NCAA said that would be too costly for smaller schools and stuck strictly with tuition/room/board/books/fees.

I thought some conferences DID start paying stipends to cover cost of living? Was that fake news or am I misremembering?

 

[Vassar69]

Even at Michigan the NIL value of a top D Tackle or cornerback won’t likely match any flashy RB, QB or WR. So while the Michigan’s of the world can splash a few names, Northwestern can raise the floor by leveraging value for all players via internships in Chicago. Performance and payments for a few versus opportunities for all.

So Michigan (or any other massive Big Ten university ranked in the top 50 - Ohio State, Illinois, Purdue, Rutgers, etc.) can’t also offer internships?

 

[DarthCat]

Because that’s what HS players with NFL aspirations REALLY want, low paying internships they have to hike back and forth to the city for and compete for their limited time every day.

You know, as opposed to just getting checks sent to them for sales of their jerseys, having their picture on a billboard, or hawking a product on Instagram. 🙄

 

[zeek55]

Tuition and books?

Sure if we go back to the old days where head coaches are earning $100k a year and there's no giant TV deals.

The reality is that college football is a multi-billion dollar sport.

Our institution makes somewhere around $70-90 million from just football related income in a normal year.

Tuition and books/room/board gives players around $5 million give or take; is it fair that their cut is that small?

Every professional sport gives somewhere around 40-50% of total income to their athletes. I'm not saying they need to be compensated by professionals, but we're way past the point where it's fair that they're just getting the absolute basics when the rest of the sport has become a giant money grab.

My favored scenario was always to just create escrow accounts for the players and give them money at graduation or whenever they leave as long as it's in good standing.

Something like a $500k escrow account upon graduation (maybe 50% releases immediately, 50% after 10 years) always made sense to me as a proper reward for their service as an athlete representing the university.

 

[Booty Maximus]

I thought some conferences DID start paying stipends to cover cost of living? Was that fake news or am I misremembering?

No, you're correct. Has been the case for a long time now.

 

[FeralFelidae]

Every professional sport gives somewhere around 40-50% of total income to their athletes. I'm not saying they need to be compensated by professionals, but we're way past the point where it's fair that they're just getting the absolute basics when the rest of the sport has become a giant money grab.

How much "total income" do the non-revenue sports bring? The women's sports especially?

We can reduce their compensation to 40-50% of the "total income" they bring in.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

...but we're way past the point where it's fair that they're just getting the absolute basics when the rest of the sport has become a giant money grab....

No. We are not past that point at all. What you call the "absolute basics" is a very generous package for athletes to have and allows them to complete their education. The fact that the school earns money from the athletic events is irrelevant.

 

[zeek55]

No. We are not past that point at all. What you call the "absolute basics" is a very generous package for athletes to have and allows them to complete their education. The fact that the school earns money from the athletic events is irrelevant.

Yes, SCOTUS put us well past that point. This isn't 1984 when we had a true amateur system with money just beginning to enter college athletics in a big way (through TV), and amateurism was an effective defense.

The NCAA has effective monopsony power over the services of student athletes. This is not a competitive market.

Kavanaugh's concurrence in this recent case will likely carry more weight in the future because he touched on the whole concept of amateurism.

You can't simply define the services as being required to be undercompensated and use that as a defense for undercompensating because its entirely circular logic. The whole NCAA concept of schools earning billions on the backs of student athletes earning thousands is basically going to get shredded in future court cases.

Everyone knows that if college sports looked anything like a competitive market with schools able to pay players that players would command 6 figure salaries at minimum at Power 5 schools.

How much "total income" do the non-revenue sports bring? The women's sports especially?

We can reduce their compensation to 40-50% of the "total income" they bring in.

Yes, this will be the other side of the token.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

Yes, SCOTUS put us well past that point. This isn't 1984 when we had a true amateur system with money just beginning to enter college athletics in a big way (through TV), and amateurism was an effective defense.

The NCAA has effective monopsony power over the services of student athletes. This is not a competitive market.

Kavanaugh's concurrence in this recent case will likely carry more weight in the future because he touched on the whole concept of amateurism.

You can't simply define the services as being required to be undercompensated and use that as a defense for undercompensating because its entirely circular logic. The whole NCAA concept of schools earning billions on the backs of student athletes earning thousands is basically going to get shredded in future court cases.

Everyone knows that if college sports looked anything like a competitive market with schools able to pay players that players would command 6 figure salaries at minimum at Power 5 schools.




Yes, this will be the other side of the token.

The recent SCOTUS ruling is unfortunate, since it starts to move college athletics from amateurism where it belongs to professional where it does not belong. The amount of money involved is irrelevant, or at least should be. When we let money determine what is right and wrong it is a very sad day and state of affairs.

 

[Sheffielder]

No, you're correct. Has been the case for a long time now.

Apologies for misspeaking here, it looks like this became permissible around 2015, I'm a little behind in the times, but what shouldn't be lost here on my mistake is the fact that it came after quite a bit of deliberation and resistance. I would argue the issue was delayed as long as it was because "fairness to all member schools" was absolutely, 100% more of a priority than looking out for the needs of student athletes - namely the most needy.

This general attitude of prioritizing many, many other things before student benefits and compensation is, in my opinion, how the free for all we're about to see is coming to pass.

 

[Sheffielder]

No. We are not past that point at all. What you call the "absolute basics" is a very generous package for athletes to have and allows them to complete their education. The fact that the school earns money from the athletic events is irrelevant.

Whether we like to admit it or not (and yes, Northwestern is perhaps in a unique position where this isn't such an issue, but...) not all guys choose to play college football for the purity of the sport and access to a college degree.

And if we agree this is true, then we need to, at some level, acknowledge that compensation is a consideration for certain kids when they decide to go here instead of there. Can't ignore the obscene amount of money that CFB programs bring in.

The funny part here is this has all the makings to support a semi-pro football league where kids who don't wanna play school can do their thing and that would leave college football to kids who just want something to do in between classes - that is, until state legislatures passed laws enabling college athletes to profit from their names, images, and likenesses.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

The recent SCOTUS ruling is unfortunate, since it starts to move college athletics from amateurism where it belongs to professional where it does not belong. The amount of money involved is irrelevant, or at least should be. When we let money determine what is right and wrong it is a very sad day and state of affairs.

When is money ever irrelevant? It’s only irrelevant to people who have a lot of it.

 

[Sheffielder]

And then there's LSU... who literally changed their logo to NILSU, with the slick tag line "What's the Deal?"

...poised and ready to leverage the NIL era to its fullest extent as a recruiting tool, eager to convince kids who can't spell their own names that if they come to Baton Rouge, they will be 18-year-old millionaires.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

Whether we like to admit it or not (and yes, Northwestern is perhaps in a unique position where this isn't such an issue, but...) not all guys choose to play college football for the purity of the sport and access to a college degree.

And if we agree this is true, then we need to, at some level, acknowledge that compensation is a consideration for certain kids when they decide to go here instead of there. Can't ignore the obscene amount of money that CFB programs bring in.

The funny part here is this has all the makings to support a semi-pro football league where kids who don't wanna play school can do their thing and that would leave college football to kids who just want something to do in between classes - that is, until state legislatures passed laws enabling college athletes to profit from their names, images, and likenesses.

The amount of money that college football brings in is totally irrelevant to the issue of amateurism vs professionalism.

Suppose that college football was a break even affair. Or perhaps yielded only a modest profit.

Would you still want to pay extra money to some players beyond their already generous athletic scholarship benefit?

And if your answer to that is NO, then at exactly what level of profit would the extra payments start? One million dollars? Ten million? One hundred million? More? What exactly is an "obscene amount of money"?

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

The amount of money that college football brings in is totally irrelevant to the issue of amateurism vs professionalism.

Suppose that college football was a break even affair. Or perhaps yielded only a modest profit.

Would you still want to pay extra money to some players beyond their already generous athletic scholarship benefit?

And if your answer to that is NO, then at exactly what level of profit would the extra payments start? One million dollars? Ten million? One hundred million? More? What exactly is an "obscene amount of money"?

Yes, the market dictates the compensation. If the end result is the deal doesn’t return the expected profit, future deals are not as lucrative.

 

[NUCat320]

I’m sure this thread is hilarious.

Twin Fresno State women’s basketball players with 5 million social media followers have turned their following into a deal with Boost Mobile.

There’s definitely a market here.

Among many, many others:

Name, Image and Likeness: Tracking early deals, potential stars, the weird, interesting, quirky, and more

Here are some of the deals, endorsements, partnerships and more that college athletes around the country are announcing.

theathletic.com

 

[CaliforniaCat]

Yes, the market dictates the compensation. If the end result is the deal doesn’t return the expected profit, future deals are not as lucrative.

What has that got to do with amateurism vs professionalism? That is the real issue here, not the money.

Amateurs, which is what college athletes have always been considered to be at least up until now, do not get paid anything beyond their basic needs. And that is true regardless of how much money their educational institution has or may earn from their performance.

Professionals get paid money based on how much their participating organization has and is willing to give them.

The difference is night and day unless you want to obscure it as obviously some people want to do now.

 

[NUCat320]

Appeal to tradition is perhaps the greatest of the logical fallacies. Escalation of commitment is probably the other.

 

[TheC]

What has that got to do with amateurism vs professionalism? That is the real issue here, not the money.

Amateurs, which is what college athletes have always been considered to be at least up until now, do not get paid anything beyond their basic needs. And that is true regardless of how much money their educational institution has or may earn from their performance.

Professionals get paid money based on how much their participating organization has and is willing to give them.

The difference is night and day unless you want to obscure it as obviously some people want to do now.

But how do you define what is amateurism vs what is professionalism? Am I an amateur piano player until the day that someone decides they want to pay me to play? An amateur musician can play in the band in college, but then also do gigs for money. Are they a professional or an amateur? It always seemed like the amateurism of college football players was a forced amateurism, because there are clearly people who will pay money to see them play.

That all said, I am totally sympathetic to the bigger argument that I think you and others are making - this whole thing is going to get ugly and probably change the way we experience and enjoy college sports. I wish the NCAA had been able to find a better compromise solution years ago before it came to this.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

....
That all said, I am totally sympathetic to the bigger argument that I think you and others are making - this whole thing is going to get ugly and probably change the way we experience and enjoy college sports. I wish the NCAA had been able to find a better compromise solution years ago before it came to this.

Yeah, I agree with that part about the changes it will bring. And I'm most concerned about the jealousies that are inevitable between the various team members based on the stars getting paid a lot more than the average players. Who may, in fact, get nothing.

This is certainly going to change the personal dynamics and in very subtle ways that may not be obvious also change the total team performance.

 

[zeek55]

But how do you define what is amateurism vs what is professionalism? Am I an amateur piano player until the day that someone decides they want to pay me to play? An amateur musician can play in the band in college, but then also do gigs for money. Are they a professional or an amateur? It always seemed like the amateurism of college football players was a forced amateurism, because there are clearly people who will pay money to see them play.

That all said, I am totally sympathetic to the bigger argument that I think you and others are making - this whole thing is going to get ugly and probably change the way we experience and enjoy college sports. I wish the NCAA had been able to find a better compromise solution years ago before it came to this.

Yes, this is why my preferred outcome was always "deferred compensation" with escrow accounts.

This would not have gotten anywhere near as ugly if the NCAA had allowed schools to give something like (just pulling numbers out of thin air) 20% of a sport's revenue to the collective group of athlete of that sport up to a maximum of say $200k per year and that the money would be put into an escrow account that the athlete receives upon graduation.

And allow them to pursue other activities to earn income like NIL.

There could have been a stipulation that if someone actually needs the money to survive, they could access like 20% of it for them and their family to use.

There's a lot of ways to have done this that would have kept the amateurism aspect of not wanting college students earning mega paydays while the rest of their peers are not (i.e. that's the point of deferred compensation), but it's just hard to ignore the giant amounts of money being generated by the activity of the athletes and not think that they should be compensated in some fashion.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Yeah, I agree with that part about the changes it will bring. And I'm most concerned about the jealousies that are inevitable between the various team members based on the stars getting paid a lot more than the average players. Who may, in fact, may get nothing.

This is certainly going to change the personal dynamics and in very subtle ways that may not be obvious also change the total team performance.

Jealous? Then the other players need to market themselves better. Maybe they just need to get better. There is always a personal dynamic involved in a team. Some players are better and get more attention, whether there is money involved or not. that’s life. Don’t get in the arena if you can’t deal with that.

 

[FeralFelidae]

This would not have gotten anywhere near as ugly if the NCAA had allowed schools to give something like (just pulling numbers out of thin air) 20% of a sport's revenue to the collective group of athlete of that sport up to a maximum of say $200k per year and that the money would be put into an escrow account that the athlete receives upon graduation.

Not all NCAA schools are elite private schools in the Big Ten with 11-digit endowments.

 

[willycat]

Tuition and books?

And?????????????

 

[FeralFelidae]

And?????????????

And what? The cost-of-living stipend that is also being paid?

 

[CaliforniaCat]

Jealous? Then the other players need to market themselves better. Maybe they just need to get better. There is always a personal dynamic involved in a team. Some players are better and get more attention, whether there is money involved or not. that’s life. Don’t get in the arena if you can’t deal with that.

Absurd comments. So now college athletes not only need to worry about their studies and their team performance, but they have to learn to "market themselves better." Suddenly on top of everything else they have to learn to be expert marketers. Ridiculous.

Or they "just need to get better" as if they are not already performing at their best. And according to you they need to do this not to help the school, but to earn more money for themselves. If this doesn't sound exactly like the profile of a professional athlete, then I don't know what does.

And there is a huge difference between a teammate getting more attention for his performance versus that same person getting more money in what is suppose to be an amateur endeavor. The former is natural and expected. The later is not. To not understand that is very naïve. And the consequence on total team performance could be much more detrimental than some people today are willing to acknowledge.

 

[RhabdoWildcat]

But how do you define what is amateurism vs what is professionalism? Am I an amateur piano player until the day that someone decides they want to pay me to play? An amateur musician can play in the band in college, but then also do gigs for money. Are they a professional or an amateur? It always seemed like the amateurism of college football players was a forced amateurism, because there are clearly people who will pay money to see them play.

That all said, I am totally sympathetic to the bigger argument that I think you and others are making - this whole thing is going to get ugly and probably change the way we experience and enjoy college sports. I wish the NCAA had been able to find a better compromise solution years ago before it came to this.

True amateurism would be club sports. That's been the problem. Most college sports, at least the modern version, is not amateurism. It's semi-pro leagues masquerading as amateurism.

I've always hoped for a semi-pro/developmental league for sports and to leave college alone. IMO, college sports should be college kids. Coaches should be paid a stipend or what an adjunct lecturer is paid.

This is a pipedream of course but that's what I define it as.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Absurd comments. So now college athletes not only need to worry about their studies and their team performance, but they have to learn to "market themselves better." Suddenly on top of everything else they have to learn to be expert marketers. Ridiculous.

Or they "just need to get better" as if they are not already performing at their best. And according to you they need to do this not to help the school, but to earn more money for themselves. If this doesn't sound exactly like the profile of a professional athlete, then I don't know what does.

And there is a huge difference between a teammate getting more attention for his performance versus that same person getting more money in what is suppose to be an amateur endeavor. The former is natural and expected. The later is not. To not understand that is very naïve. And the consequence on total team performance could be much more detrimental than some people today are willing to acknowledge.

Naive? Have you even been a D1 scholarship athlete? I have a little experience in this and can tell you that teammates want what is best for their teammates. You know they are actually happy when a teammate does well, gets recognized, and though the dynamic is different in the NIL era, I would bet my house they would encourage their teammates to take advantage of all opportunities presented to them.

How many players do you see complaining that there are now NIL opportunities for athletes? Are D1 Coaches up in arms over the preservation of amateurism? What is naive is to still be thinking D1 Football &BBall are some last stand against the professionalism. It’s about money the last couple decades. This was inevitable. Coaches, Administrators and even University Presidents make a bundle of cash and actual athletes have been restricted from the same free market. You may not like it, but This is 2021 not 1982.

 

[zeek55]

Not all NCAA schools are elite private schools in the Big Ten with 11-digit endowments.

I'm speaking strictly of a portion of revenue going to players, not anything more.

I think any well run AD can compensate for having to give something like 20% of revenue to the athletes instead of the current 5% or so. Might require cutting down in other areas but I think we all know there's probably plenty of administrative bloat for sure.

Pro sports teams operate fine giving 40-50% of revenue to athletes.

 

[NUCat320]

Absurd comments. So now college athletes not only need to worry about their studies and their team performance, but they have to learn to "market themselves better." Suddenly on top of everything else they have to learn to be expert marketers. Ridiculous.

Or they "just need to get better" as if they are not already performing at their best. And according to you they need to do this not to help the school, but to earn more money for themselves. If this doesn't sound exactly like the profile of a professional athlete, then I don't know what does.

And there is a huge difference between a teammate getting more attention for his performance versus that same person getting more money in what is suppose to be an amateur endeavor. The former is natural and expected. The later is not. To not understand that is very naïve. And the consequence on total team performance could be much more detrimental than some people today are willing to acknowledge.

I am interested in what the argument is for ‘amateurism’, given that their institutions bank (way more than by now, I imagine) ~$20 million a year for the right to broadcast their amateur pursuits.

If amateurism is what you crave, you should probably learn to love CalTech.

Edited to add: seriously, are there any commercial television stations that feature the exploits of amateurs? The four or six or ten dedicated to college athletics are probably the only ones.

Are there any non-commercial stations dedicated to amateurs? CSPAN maybe. Ha!

 

[CaliforniaCat]

I am interested in what the argument is for ‘amateurism’, given that their institutions bank (way more than by now, I imagine) ~$20 million a year for the right to broadcast their amateur pursuits.

If amateurism is what you crave, you should probably learn to love CalTech.

You and others keep making this about money. And that's the problem. It shouldn't be.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

....Coaches, Administrators and even University Presidents make a bundle of cash and actual athletes have been restricted from the same free market. You may not like it, but This is 2021 not 1982....

Coaches, Administrators and even University Presidents are paid employees of the institution. Their salaries are of no significance whatsoever to how students are treated. It's a completely different subject and irrelevant the student income issue.

Student athletes are just what the term says. They are students first. Many are on scholarships, particularly athletes, and that is perfectly fair and adequate for them.

The fact the university may realize addition income base on TV coverage of athletic events does not automatically entitle some student athletes to a portion of that income.

Again, as I said in my previous post. It is a big mistake to keep making this about money. And eventually it is going to backfire and serious compromise the quality of college athletics.

 

[FeralFelidae]

I'm speaking strictly of a portion of revenue going to players, not anything more.

I think any well run AD can compensate for having to give something like 20% of revenue to the athletes instead of the current 5% or so. Might require cutting down in other areas but I think we all know there's probably plenty of administrative bloat for sure.

Pro sports teams operate fine giving 40-50% of revenue to athletes.

https://www.al.com/sports/2014/08/ncaa_study_finds_all_but_20_fb.html

Most athletic departments are not making a profit.

Because they fund non-revenue sports. Title IX and all that.

 

[CaliforniaCat]

.... You know they are actually happy when a teammate does well, gets recognized, and though the dynamic is different in the NIL era, I would bet my house they would encourage their teammates to take advantage of all opportunities presented to them. ...

I'm not so sure that you are right about that when it comes to money. I can see significant jealousies and resentments developing even though they aren't vocalized by the players not getting any of the money.