O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

[mnstate0fhockey]

"The college athlete certainly serves in his or her own perceived self interest in participating college sports, but it's a fact that the efforts of college athletes result in billions of dollars of revenue for colleges

Keep repeating this over and over, but it's falling on deaf ears when fact remains 88% of collegiate programs operate at a loss.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

Keep repeating this over and over, but it's falling on deaf ears when fact remains 88% of collegiate programs operate at a loss.

Well, let's look at which students are most in need. And I can guarantee you that basketball players need the money more. Hockey costs a ton of money to play. Baseball costs a lot of money. Swimming and gymnastics cost a lot. You are asking the poor students to subsidize the education of the rich ones. Snap out of it.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Well, let's look at which students are most in need. And I can guarantee you that basketball players need the money more. Hockey costs a ton of money to play. Baseball costs a lot of money. Swimming and gymnastics cost a lot. You are asking the poor students to subsidize the education of the rich ones. Snap out of it.

You have got to be kidding me. You're whole argument is premised upon players who made MILLIONS after college thinking they are getting screwed out of more money.

 

[Laker54]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

After putting 2 kids through college and hearing other stories of the cost of 4 years or more of school my opinion is the athlete on scholarship did get paid and well. I would agree there should be some fine tuning to the way it is done.

If the athletic departments are making that much money put it back into the college to lower the cost of tuition for students.

 

[MaineHockeyMom]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

You have got to be kidding me. You're whole argument is premised upon players who made MILLIONS after college thinking they are getting screwed out of more money.

that is not the issue.

This is an antitrust (monopoly/restraint-of-competition) matter.

the NCAA does not allow the student athletes to compete in the marketplace because of their monopoly.

let me ask you this: if you made 4 million last year, but you knew you were worth 100 million, were you "screwed out of" any money?

 

[MaineHockeyMom]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

If schools are forced to start paying a small group of student athletes that type of money, that is money that won't go to continuing to operate the non-revenue sports that enrich a far larger group of student's collegiate experiences. Even worse, it's money that the university wouldn't have to enrich the educational experience of all it's students.

You're worried about a small group of student athletes that are getting a free education, free room and board, access to world-class facilities, etc.. and viewing them as victims, but you aren't giving a moment's thought to the impact on a far larger group of student athletes and students as a whole.

how about if it isn't the schools that pay them, but it is the video game makers and the TV networks who pay the students and not pay the NCAA?

 

[FiveHole12]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

It's pretty simple.

If you're an athlete who doesn't value a free education and room and board, the world class facilities, coaching, and free exposure, then turn pro right away and practice your trade elsewhere.

The fact that these kids DO choose to play in the NCAA instead of doing that leads me to believe they DO receive value from playing in the NCAA.

The fact that a small group of these athletes that go on to make millions after school are trying to squeeze some money out of their school without taking into account the costs the schools incurred to educate and train them, or the other student athletes and students at their university, nauseates me.

Pffft... these kids don't need college. They could put together a much better marketing campaign to showcase their talents directly from their neighborhood b-ball court or semi--pro football league... much better than they could with any NCAA tv exposure.
50k plus pay from a college? Chump change. Peddling coffee at Starbucks is much more lucrative to finance your marketing campaign.

I say... screw 'em all. Everyone should live the D-3 college student/amateur athlete experience.

 

[4four4]

It's pretty simple.

If you're an athlete who doesn't value a free education and room and board, the world class facilities, coaching, and free exposure, then turn pro right away and practice your trade elsewhere.

The fact that these kids DO choose to play in the NCAA instead of doing that leads me to believe they DO receive value from playing in the NCAA.

The fact that a small group of these athletes that go on to make millions after school are trying to squeeze some money out of their school without taking into account the costs the schools incurred to educate and train them, or the other student athletes and students at their university, nauseates me.

A perfect reason why we need to see a MJFL and a MJBL. It would change the dynamic of both revenue sports.

 

[jnacc]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

A perfect reason why we need to see a MJFL and a MJBL. It would change the dynamic of both revenue sports.

Can't see the super conferences liking that idea all that much....I don't think they would want to play second fiddle like NCAA hockey does to the CHL in terms of where the majority of the top talent ends up.

 

[purpleinnebraska]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Can't see the super conferences liking that idea all that much....I don't think they would want to play second fiddle like NCAA hockey does to the CHL in terms of where the majority of the top talent ends up.

BB should switch to a hockey-style draft, taking 18 year-olds, and giving them an honest eval of whether they should go to college, to the minors, or (extremely rarely) the big leagues. It removes the idiocy of declaring for the draft, which is often done by guys who aren't ready, and then have no good alternatives afterwards.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

that is not the issue.

This is an antitrust (monopoly/restraint-of-competition) matter.

the NCAA does not allow the student athletes to compete in the marketplace because of their monopoly.

let me ask you this: if you made 4 million last year, but you knew you were worth 100 million, were you "screwed out of" any money?

Sports leagues have been exempt from antitrust legislation for more than a century. Good luck with that court battle. The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and NCAA will throw more $$ at that court battle than you can imagine. That will never change.

And most of these kids we are talking about go into the NFL and NBA as soon as they are eligible. They are only playing in the NCAA because they aren't eligible to play in the NFL and NBA sooner.

So you tell me, how much is an 18-year old kid who isn't eligible for the NFL or NBA draft really "worth"? In other words, outside playing in the NCAA, how much could they make? And if it is a significant amount of money (with more than their scholarship and NCAA perks give them), why aren't they doing it?

And congrats for being the umpteenth person to talk about how much these kids make for the NCAA, but then completely ignore how much the NCAA schools spend. It was sourced above - 88% of NCAA programs operate at a loss.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Pffft... these kids don't need college. They could put together a much better marketing campaign to showcase their talents directly from their neighborhood b-ball court or semi--pro football league... much better than they could with any NCAA tv exposure.
50k plus pay from a college? Chump change. Peddling coffee at Starbucks is much more lucrative to finance your marketing campaign.

I say... screw 'em all. Everyone should live the D-3 college student/amateur athlete experience.

If they thought they could market themselves to pro leagues better outside the NCAA they would be doing so. They aren't.

Why? Because the education and NCAA exposure is valuable.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

how about if it isn't the schools that pay them, but it is the video game makers and the TV networks who pay the students and not pay the NCAA?

Read the article Harley posted. That's a bad idea and that article explains why. After the kids graduate they can get paid by whomever will pay them. Or, don't play for an NCAA school and get paid right away.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

A perfect reason why we need to see a MJFL and a MJBL. It would change the dynamic of both revenue sports.

That would be fine by me. Kids would have more options.

 

[Tipsy McStagger]

You have got to be kidding me. You're whole argument is premised upon players who made MILLIONS after college thinking they are getting screwed out of more money.

Hold on... you said 98% of these kids wont make a dime playing professionally. So which is it? Are they all millionaires that don't need the money or are they kids that wont make any money playing sports? You want to have it both ways.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Hold on... you said 98% of these kids wont make a dime playing professionally. So which is it? Are they all millionaires that don't need the money or are they kids that wont make any money playing sports? You want to have it both ways.

Haha... Nice spin. 98% of kids don't make millions. If you are going to pay players what they are worth (see note below), how does that help those 98%???

Or are you now suggesting the NCAA pay every NCAA athlete??? How are you suggesting they pay for that??

Seriously, this is getting comical.

NOTE: Even the players who make millions after school aren't worth that when they play in the NCAA. If they were, they wouldn't be playing in the NCAA. If they feel like they could make more than the NCAA (in terms of educational benefits and other perks), they would take that. They don't because they aren't worth squat outside the NCAA.

 

[FiveHole12]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

This is an antitrust (monopoly/restraint-of-competition) matter.

the NCAA does not allow the student athletes to compete in the marketplace because of their monopoly.

It's not a market place, it's a college education, and they get to choose any school they want. In hockey there are more choices. A kid can get paid and be a professional in his mid teens.
You want to see a monopoly? Start paying players and a handful of schools/teams will BUY all the top talent.
But then again, maybe it is a market place. The court will decide if these kids are going to school or going to work.

Here's an idea. Create a new league where you recruit players right out of high school. Offer them big bucks for their services (at least 50k per year for the scrubs, or equal to room, board and tuition of whatever school they were thinking of attending). Considering the argument here is that the kids would rather be paid to show up for work rather than attend class, eat and sleep for free, NCAA athletics will be out of business overnight. This is a no brainer for those with a entrepreneur's spirit.

If they thought they could market themselves to pro leagues better outside the NCAA they would be doing so. They aren't.

Why? Because the education and NCAA exposure is valuable.

I was being sarcastic. I happen to agree with you.

 

[mnstate0fhockey]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Sorry FiveHole

 

[Osorojo]

Re: O'Bannon Case and its ripple effect on college hockey

Sports leagues have been exempt from antitrust legislation for more than a century. Good luck with that court battle. The NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and NCAA will throw more $$ at that court battle than you can imagine. That will never change.

And most of these kids we are talking about go into the NFL and NBA as soon as they are eligible. They are only playing in the NCAA because they aren't eligible to play in the NFL and NBA sooner.

So you tell me, how much is an 18-year old kid who isn't eligible for the NFL or NBA draft really "worth"? In other words, outside playing in the NCAA, how much could they make? And if it is a significant amount of money (with more than their scholarship and NCAA perks give them), why aren't they doing it?

And congrats for being the umpteenth person to talk about how much these kids make for the NCAA, but then completely ignore how much the NCAA schools spend. It was sourced above - 88% of NCAA programs operate at a loss.

"That will never change." This statement contradicts both reason and experience. It sounds like whistling in the dark. It also assumes court decisions are the property of the highest bidder.

 

[bothman]

"That will never change." This statement contradicts both reason and experience. It sounds like whistling in the dark. It also assumes court decisions are the property of the highest bidder.

Didn't OJ validate that?