It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cali to allow college athletes to be paid

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

That's been a rule forever for a reason though. We'll have the same top teams year in and year out because the smaller schools won't be able to recruit as well. This is like taking the voice away from smaller states in the presidential election. And, once again, an idea straight out of California.




posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Bluntone22

Very stupid. Only California would make a move this stupid. They'll be in violation of NCAA rules and not allowed to play in any bowl games once this takes effect. I'm 99.9% sure every game they play in the regular season will be forfeited as well.

You said not to bring up the scholarship, but that's tens of thousands of dollars PER semester that's paid for. That should be more than enough.


So should an engineering student who is also on a scholarship be prevented from taking paid internships or working part time?


This is an excellent point when framed as paid versus unpaid internships.

So folks, should a student on a scholarship be preventing from working while in school because they have a scholarship? If the answer is yes, that's far beyond stupid. If the answer is no, you see why it's a no-brainer for athletes to be able to do the same.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: burdman30ott6

They could I suppose but if other states pass similar legislation the ncaa will have far less leverage. How the athletic conferences react is important too. If the SEC and ACC hop on board, it would put huge pressure on the ncaa.
The ncaa has become to big for its britches


The ACC wouldn't make a difference. The SEC would have the biggest impact, maybe the B1G and Big 12, too, but none of those conferences are interested in paying the players.


Tha ACC is huge in basketball so I think they matter.
This doesn't have much to do with what the conferences want as much as they would legally have no choice.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: hyperlexic

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Bluntone22

NCAA can easily rescind accreditation from each CA school that violates NCAA rules prohibiting pay for play. That would ultimately make CA a league unto themselves and neuter their revenue as well as their attractiveness to upper tier athletes.


The fact that the upper tir athletes can get paid in Cali will be attraction enough


What's the point of going to a university that is banned from playing outside of the state?


There's not one. All the schools on the west coast are junk anyways. Football players go for 2 years and bolt for the NFL if they can, so if they pay their players, I'd have a law thrown in there that it's mandatory they graduate before going into the NFL. And they must major in something besides Interdisciplinary Studies or Physical Education.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: hyperlexic

California sure can't get upper tier athletes now...lol


That’s funny because most of the upper tier athletes come from California not Alabama.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Bluntone22

Very stupid. Only California would make a move this stupid. They'll be in violation of NCAA rules and not allowed to play in any bowl games once this takes effect. I'm 99.9% sure every game they play in the regular season will be forfeited as well.

You said not to bring up the scholarship, but that's tens of thousands of dollars PER semester that's paid for. That should be more than enough.


So should an engineering student who is also on a scholarship be prevented from taking paid internships or working part time?


This is an excellent point when framed as paid versus unpaid internships.

So folks, should a student on a scholarship be preventing from working while in school because they have a scholarship? If the answer is yes, that's far beyond stupid. If the answer is no, you see why it's a no-brainer for athletes to be able to do the same.


There is no logical reason that a student athlete should not be allowed to work and earn money. None. If student athletes can't work, then why aren't other students prevented from working while in school?

I had academic scholarships and still worked when I was both in undergrad and graduate school.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Veryolduser

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: hyperlexic

California sure can't get upper tier athletes now...lol


That’s funny because most of the upper tier athletes come from California not Alabama.



They might grow up in California but they go to college at Alabama, Georgia,Clemson,Ohio state, Oklahoma,,,,,



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: hyperlexic
I have always thought college athletes should be allowed to profit from their own names.

The one argument against it as so lame . That they are getting a free education.. what a crock.

They work their asses off for those scholarships. Nothing is free.


Right, they work their asses off for a scholarship that costs everyone else, at USC for example, $77,459.00 per year, $74,570.00 per year at Stanford, and $65,545.00 per year at UCLA.


they can charge whatever they want it doesnt make it worth that much. And the school risks nothing
edit on 30-9-2019 by hyperlexic because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Bluntone22

Very stupid. Only California would make a move this stupid. They'll be in violation of NCAA rules and not allowed to play in any bowl games once this takes effect. I'm 99.9% sure every game they play in the regular season will be forfeited as well.

You said not to bring up the scholarship, but that's tens of thousands of dollars PER semester that's paid for. That should be more than enough.


So should an engineering student who is also on a scholarship be prevented from taking paid internships or working part time?


This is an excellent point when framed as paid versus unpaid internships.

So folks, should a student on a scholarship be preventing from working while in school because they have a scholarship? If the answer is yes, that's far beyond stupid. If the answer is no, you see why it's a no-brainer for athletes to be able to do the same.


There is no logical reason that a student athlete should not be allowed to work and earn money. None. If student athletes can't work, then why aren't other students prevented from working while in school?

I had academic scholarships and still worked when I was both in undergrad and graduate school.


Thats to prevent stars from getting paid $10k to sign autographs at a car dealership..
Boosters paying players to attend their school of choice.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:13 PM
link   
a reply to: hyperlexic

Yeah, the only people that pay those amounts are rich foreign students or uber rich. Average person isn't paying that much in tuition per year. Heavily discounted.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

This will open a can of worms due to Title IX.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Bluntone22

This will open a can of worms due to Title IX.


Absolutely..
The women will be left out.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

why not use the endorsement money to put back into the school to lower tuition for all students?



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:19 PM
link   
a reply to: panoz77

The NCAA does not forbid college athletes from working. If you were one, you know that. Instead, it's tightly controlled to prevent donors from paying athletes to do nothing under the guise of a job, but nothing short of hour constraints prevented me from having a job while I was an athlete. There were several athletes on scholarship while I was there who worked summer jobs especially.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Bluntone22

Very stupid. Only California would make a move this stupid. They'll be in violation of NCAA rules and not allowed to play in any bowl games once this takes effect. I'm 99.9% sure every game they play in the regular season will be forfeited as well.

You said not to bring up the scholarship, but that's tens of thousands of dollars PER semester that's paid for. That should be more than enough.


So should an engineering student who is also on a scholarship be prevented from taking paid internships or working part time?


This is an excellent point when framed as paid versus unpaid internships.

So folks, should a student on a scholarship be preventing from working while in school because they have a scholarship? If the answer is yes, that's far beyond stupid. If the answer is no, you see why it's a no-brainer for athletes to be able to do the same.


There is no logical reason that a student athlete should not be allowed to work and earn money. None. If student athletes can't work, then why aren't other students prevented from working while in school?

I had academic scholarships and still worked when I was both in undergrad and graduate school.


Thats to prevent stars from getting paid $10k to sign autographs at a car dealership..
Boosters paying players to attend their school of choice.


But again, WHY does it matter?

So what if some car dealer wants to pay Johnny Quarterback $10k to sign autographs at his dealership? Who cares? Why is that an issue?

The boosters and schools already offer a ton of non-financial perks to woo star athletes. Big stadiums. Trainers. Tutors. Cheerleaders (wink wink). Coaches at some of these schools make like $4 million / yr. More than the school Presidents many times over.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: subfab
a reply to: Bluntone22

why not use the endorsement money to put back into the school to lower tuition for all students?


I'm not sure how the money is distributed in the schools.
But I do know that a couple men's programs at these schools pays for all the women's scholarships so in that sense students benefit.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: hyperlexic

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Bluntone22

NCAA can easily rescind accreditation from each CA school that violates NCAA rules prohibiting pay for play. That would ultimately make CA a league unto themselves and neuter their revenue as well as their attractiveness to upper tier athletes.


The fact that the upper tir athletes can get paid in Cali will be attraction enough

If CA is banned from the NCAA what top tier athlete will go to CA and severely hurt their chance to enter the Pros?


The ones who only care about money right then.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

It matters if you're trying to create a fair playing field.

If one school if known for churning out rich doctors and lawyers while the other churns out prestigious professionals of its own but in fields that don't tend to pay as well ... then one school's boosters can buy the better team always and forever that way.

Because sports do bring in lots of money. It then is a matter of one school struggling to stay afloat because they just don't have the money like the other school does because they can buy it between buying the team and eleventy billion blue chip recruits who then destroy everything everyone else fields and bring in all that associated revenue.

Pretty poor fun for every other school in the US.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated


I imagine it comes down to the supposed amateur status of the athletes and to prevent buying national titles. Michigan tried a few years ago with the fab five.



posted on Sep, 30 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22

originally posted by: subfab
a reply to: Bluntone22

why not use the endorsement money to put back into the school to lower tuition for all students?


I'm not sure how the money is distributed in the schools.
But I do know that a couple men's programs at these schools pays for all the women's scholarships so in that sense students benefit.


You say it pays for the womens scholarships like the school is actually out that money. The school risks nothing .



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join