UCLA's Chip Kelly advocates for single Power 5 conference

Donate To GopherHole
Some guy said:
There are currently 16 SEC and 18 big ten.
I’m not sure 64 makes sense. Don’t think there are 30 teams left that generate revenue:
Notre Dame
North Carolina
Virginia
Colorado
Arizona state
Utah
Florida state
Clemson


I’m spent
Click to expand...
If you’re doing it from scratch, there is simply no valid reason to assert either that every current Big Ten and SEC team are in or should be in.
 

fmlizard said:
The more formal things get, the better it might become for Minnesota

Formality will likely bring some kind of revenue sharing or rules that keep Minnesota from getting crushed. It might usher in a fairer structure that gives us a better chance than the recruit-and-play-for-free era.

Just as long as that formal structure includes Minnesota🤞
Click to expand...
In my mind the biggest thing is still this:

all the NIL and money ultimately boils down to recruiting. Getting a player to pick your school, in the first place.

There are still a lot of things working against this school and location, even if we have some money to offer.


Say another way: if they actually got to choose which NFL team they wanted to go to, very few top draft guys would choose to want to come to the Vikings as their top five.
 

MplsGopher said:
If you’re doing it from scratch, there is simply no valid reason to assert either that every current Big Ten and SEC team are in or should be in.
Click to expand...
We aren’t doing it from scratch though. Reality does exist (I think)
 

MplsGopher said:
Of course you shouldn’t name names, nor do I or anyone else want you to.

You could however come out unequivocally and say something like:
“I have intimate knowledge that an individual, who had zero official connection to the U or any of the football staff, offered a football recruit cash in the hopes of influencing their decision to commit to Fleck’s team”.

Guessing you won’t do that though.
Click to expand...

I don't need to prove anything to you. You can choose to believe what you want to believe. We have players in our three major men's sports who have received gifts well beyond an NCAA approved scholarship and this isn't in the Clem Era as you originally suggested and then updated to the Brewster Era. More recent than that.

Guessing you won't believe that though.

Go Gophers!!
 

TruthSeeker said:
NIL can never legally go away.

Why do people keep talking about solutions that involve no NIL?

It's here to stay forever. Get over it.

Whatever new system people want must include NIL.
Click to expand...
The only chance of it going away or at least being curtailed is if Congress addresses it somehow, but that's not happening anytime soon.
 


howeda7 said:
The only chance of it going away or at least being curtailed is if Congress addresses it somehow, but that's not happening anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Yep, the NCAA cannot make it go away. Congress could.
 

Bob_Loblaw said:
Yep, the NCAA cannot make it go away. Congress could.
Click to expand...
Only partially. NIL stems from the 1st Amendment, as I'm sure you're aware. Congress can't take those rights away from atheletes, let alone limit college athletes and allow other college students to benefit in anyway they are able. That'd cause all sorts of constitutional problems.

The best Congress could do is narrowly curtail it, and there isn't a lot of of wiggle room there.
 

TruthSeeker said:
Only partially. NIL stems from the 1st Amendment, as I'm sure you're aware. Congress can't take those rights away from atheletes, let alone limit college athletes and allow other college students to benefit in anyway they are able. That'd cause all sorts of constitutional problems.

The best Congress could do is narrowly curtail it, and there isn't a lot of of wiggle room there.
Click to expand...
There is a really interesting and publicly available journal article called "Putting the First Amendment in Play: Name, Image, and Likeness Policies and Athlete Freedom of Speech".
 

What Congress can do is financially disincentivize the people making the payments, which doesn't violate any athlete's rights issues. Currently if you pay athlete X $5 million for an "ad" that's a business expense.
 



disco said:
Teams should do whatever it takes to win, at all costs.
Click to expand...
Murder??? Seems a bit extreme. Or were you thinking more like Tonya Harding pipe to the knees type stuff?
 

MplsGopher said:
Market forces? Huh??

What market forces dictate the NFL salary cap and restrictions on how much rookies can make, and that they have to go whichever team drafts them to start?

That’s … socialism. Marx himself couldn’t have drawn it up any more perfect.

And, in this very very narrow context, it works flawlessly.
Click to expand...

Apples and oranges.

Bottom line, the best outcome for everyone would be a proactive or negotiated cut of tv money for revenue sports athletes as a bloc at the conference or at a new entity level maybe separate legally arms reach from the conference. The games that can be played are endless given enough lobbying money or public interest pressure.

Better for the school, better for the non-rev scholarship players, and fair for the revenue athletes. Non-revs get nothing. Not perfect in that it would not be fair in terms of paying each player market value. But, it avoids employment status for the golf team, which is ludicrous. This is about re-taking NIL broadcast publicity rights revenue, not employment.
 


MaxyJR1 said:
Controlled in that it would run through the school and the school would have to report on it.
Click to expand...
The professional leagues do not presently control NIL. The players retain their own marketing rights. But at the professional level, there is a basis in reality for what businesses are paying athletes for NIL. Nick Mullens isn't getting paid anything for his NIL. Conversely, the biggest stars are making more in NIL than from their team and marketing is partly why stars want to play in bigger markets.

At the college game, NIL is based in sycophancy and except for a small handful of players, there's no connection between NIL paid and the value of the same.

How do the players give up NIL? Collective bargaining?
 



swede2 said:
The professional leagues do not presently control NIL. The players retain their own marketing rights. But at the professional level, there is a basis in reality for what businesses are paying athletes for NIL. Nick Mullens isn't getting paid anything for his NIL. Conversely, the biggest stars are making more in NIL than from their team and marketing is partly why stars want to play in bigger markets.

At the college game, NIL is based in sycophancy and except for a small handful of players, there's no connection between NIL paid and the value of the same.

How do the players give up NIL? Collective bargaining?
Click to expand...
My wife asked last night when a Gronk USAA ad was on "why did Gronk retire?"

I said he had a long career, and probably didn't need the abuse any longer. But I also mentioned that I'd read that Gronk saved all his football earnings. He lives off the interest on those, and his endorsement money, which is much more than his NFL paychecks were. This is Gronk's NIL value.
 

MplsGopher said:
You work for Microsoft. You suddenly had an epiphany on a new piece of code that would enable an unprecedented revolutionary feature on mobile phones.

Microsoft owns your idea. You do not. This is legal.


Is that not a restraint on your potential to trade your idea??

Why can’t it be a similar legal concept to that?

All that has to be done is to convince SCOTUS that it can.
Click to expand...
Do you just spit out whatever comes to mind? Intellectual property is completely different than one's own name and likeness.
 

disco said:
Intellectual property is completely different than one's own name and likeness.
Click to expand...
Of course they're not exact the same thing. Doesn't negate in the slightest that a valid argument can be made for treating them very similarly by the law.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Bottom line, the best outcome for everyone would be a proactive or negotiated cut of tv money for revenue sports athletes as a bloc at the conference or at a new entity level maybe separate legally arms reach from the conference. The games that can be played are endless given enough lobbying money or public interest pressure.

Better for the school, better for the non-rev scholarship players, and fair for the revenue athletes. Non-revs get nothing. Not perfect in that it would not be fair in terms of paying each player market value. But, it avoids employment status for the golf team, which is ludicrous. This is about re-taking NIL broadcast publicity rights revenue, not employment.
Click to expand...
Your agenda and hell-bent slant is to bypass Title IX. That's the piss in your Cheerios. That's why you're contorting so hard here, in order to keep money that is solely derived from the value of broadcasting football games out of the hands of golfers, cross-country runners, and softball players.

In all honestly, I don't disagree with the spirit of that.

That said, trying to fight student-athlete employment is the completely wrong tree to bark up. Your fight is elsewhere.


All of everything said, I actually agree that it makes sense on a lot of fronts for football players to be employees of and paid by the conference, not the school.
 

BleedGopher said:
We have players in our three major men's sports who have received gifts well beyond an NCAA approved scholarship and this isn't in the Clem Era as you originally suggested and then updated to the Brewster Era. More recent than that.
Click to expand...
Since you went out of your way here to say "gifts", and included hockey, and the overall way you've framed it .... this in no way, shape, or form is a refutation to the claim that we do/did not have bagmen.
 

Some guy said:
We aren’t doing it from scratch though.
Click to expand...
A Premeir League could very easily be from scratch. I haven't seen any valid argument for why Mississippi State must be included.
 

MplsGopher said:
A Premeir League could very easily be from scratch. I haven't seen any valid argument for why Mississippi State must be included.
Click to expand...
Nor have you seen an argument they would be included
 

MplsGopher said:
Your agenda and hell-bent slant is to bypass Title IX. That's the piss in your Cheerios. That's why you're contorting so hard here, in order to keep money that is solely derived from the value of broadcasting football games out of the hands of golfers, cross-country runners, and softball players.

In all honestly, I don't disagree with the spirit of that.

That said, trying to fight student-athlete employment is the completely wrong tree to bark up. Your fight is elsewhere.


All of everything said, I actually agree that it makes sense on a lot of fronts for football players to be employees of and paid by the conference, not the school.
Click to expand...

Correct, I think the football players should split their share of broadcast NIL. Non-revs get nothing. Women’s athletes, nope sorry. If say, women’s basketball has a broadcast tv dividend then great! Otherwise LOL, no.

Let’s return to workable sanity. I suppose each player could negotiate directly with the conference but they’ll have better bargaining power as a unified bloc. Maybe whatever entity they form could allocate third and fourth year players to receive more, I don’t know. Have fun with it. Just don’t give it to Coyle.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
Correct, I think the football players should split their share of broadcast NIL. Non-revs get nothing. Women’s athletes, nope sorry. If say, women’s basketball has a broadcast tv dividend then great! Otherwise LOL, no.

Let’s return to workable sanity. I suppose each player could negotiate directly with the conference but they’ll have better bargaining power as a unified bloc. Maybe whatever entity they form could allocate third and fourth year players to receive more, I don’t know. Have fun with it. Just don’t give it to Coyle.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see an analogy to being an NFL rookie: you make least money as a red-shirt, and your first two participation years you make lower. More money for last two participation years.

Would like to see that you can't qualify for a no-sit transfer until after your second participation year (year three if you redshirt) at your first school.

Would love to see a draft, to evenly distribute talent across the member schools, but fear that is a too big a lift.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom