- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anybody hear Moscona talking about a way to prevent opt outs in college football?
Posted on 12/2/20 at 9:53 am to civiltiger07
Posted on 12/2/20 at 9:53 am to civiltiger07
I wasn’t saying they couldn’t. I’m saying that now they’ll actually see the disparity in how much some players are worth since the money won’t be funneled as much behind the scenes.
0
Posted on 12/2/20 at 9:59 am to lsufball19
quote:
How would that prevent opt outs? Whatever money they can make on the side doesn't change the fact that they can make more in the NFL. Only way to truly prevent opt outs is if they're contract employees, which they'll never be in college.
Why fake it? If we're moving towards paying them, then just make them employees, and have them sign contracts. This way we can end the charade of having to go to class and keep a certain gpa. They can simply be employees and never have to set foot in a classroom.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:07 am to TaderSalad
quote:
How do you keep payoffs from boosters from occurring? Or do we just accept that the richest schools will dominate the scene over and over?
I think opting out is part of where we're at as a society. They are adults and if they can't learn the value of sticking around, then they should be allowed to leave.
There are coaches out there who can keep a team together. WE need one of those.
Reduce scholarships to 65, signing class to 20. Keeps parity.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:11 am to Byrdybyrd05
All this "transferring" whenever they feel like it with no repercussions, takes away the meaning of commitment. Now this "opt out". The game of college football is going down, slowly but surely. The new world we live in is all about spoiling.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:13 am to TaderSalad
quote:
ow do you keep payoffs from boosters from occurring
How do you stop it now?
quote:
Or do we just accept that the richest schools will dominate the scene over and over
yes it would devastating to CFB if the same teams dominated over and over again
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:31 am to civiltiger07
quote:
The school isn't going to be giving them anything more than they already get now?
No. That’s the entire point of going this strange route to getting kids paid. If it’s through the athletic dept, Title IX applies, which kills that entire concept right from the start. Yes, the NCAA has come up with a convoluted method to grant stipends based on attendance and such, but that’s nothing more than a bandaid.
There is no way non-revenue sport athletes deserve to be paid the way football and basketball players would, but Title IX would prevent the schools being able to do anything based directly on the revenue generated, because that heavily favors men’s sports.
By going the MIL route, individual athletes are in charge of their own destinies, which removes schools and Title IX from the equation. They are all free agents, with the ability to go out and make money by marketing themselves.
The non-revenue athletes and people at smaller schools will also benefit from this when it finally goes into effect. They will be able to do clinics, camps and do private coaching for pay all above the table. If you had a kid who was a swimmer or a girls soccer player, wouldn’t you pay a P5 athlete to instruct them? I would.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:34 am to H-Town Tiger
Make them employees and tax student-athletes for every single item they get from the school. They are getting paid for providing “services” to a school. You could also just eliminate the athletic scholarship and just make it salary in this scenario, making a student-athlete more akin to a work-study job.
That ends this whole discussion with compensation....and would cause student-athletes to wish they weren’t considered employees once they see how much the feds and state take away from their compensation.
That ends this whole discussion with compensation....and would cause student-athletes to wish they weren’t considered employees once they see how much the feds and state take away from their compensation.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:35 am to ItFliesItDies
quote:
All this "transferring" whenever they feel like it with no repercussions, takes away the meaning of commitment. Now this "opt out". The game of college football is going down, slowly but surely. The new world we live in is all about spoiling.
i agree with this. football is going to die a slow death. killed by the money
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:41 am to HughsWorkPhone
quote:
How would this prevent opt outs? Chase already has tons of followers
This isn’t just about social media. That is just one avenue, and it’s frankly pretty limited. Maybe you guys don’t keep up with tech, but people don’t just show up on YouTube and make millions anymore.
A lot of this will be driven by local businesses, and I’m sure many of them will be owned or influenced by boosters. How is that any different than what goes on under the table now?
If a local car dealership, restaurant, etc pays a player for their likeness or to be in TV or radio spots, it’s going to be in return for them being on the field. A few top players will be able to attract national ads and sponsors, but that’s also going to be contingent on them playing a certain amount of football.
A player wouldn’t lose all of their money for opting out a little early or for a bowl in year 3, but they would stand to lose a chunk of what they get if they sit their entire 3rd season. And that’s the top guys. Players who aren’t day one or two locks in the draft would lose it all by leaving early. What booster or local business is going to keep paying a kid who stops playing?
It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
This post was edited on 12/2/20 at 10:50 am
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:44 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
When agents tell kids they will start floating them cash on Dec 1, you get players like Marshall opting out.
MIL can’t prevent that, but agents are only going to do this for a select few players.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 10:53 am to Mister Flawless
quote:
Make them employees and tax student-athletes for every single item they get from the school. They are getting paid for providing “services” to a school. You could also just eliminate the athletic scholarship and just make it salary in this scenario, making a student-athlete more akin to a work-study job. That ends this whole discussion with compensation....and would cause student-athletes to wish they weren’t considered employees once they see how much the feds and state take away from their compensation.
The reason this hasn’t already been done is Title IX. Any attempt at paying unequal amounts will result in federal lawsuits and it’s not feasible to pay all athletes what your would need to keep football and basketball players interested. There is no getting around this issue without a years long legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court that isn’t guaranteed to succeed.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 11:49 am to misey94
quote:
The reason this hasn’t already been done is Title IX. Any attempt at paying unequal amounts will result in federal lawsuits and it’s not feasible to pay all athletes what your would need to keep football and basketball players interested. There is no getting around this issue without a years long legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court that isn’t guaranteed to succeed.
Thats not true. You don't have to make every sport a work study program.
You make football and basketball work study, the rest are still athletic scholarships. Their are ways around it.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 11:59 am to Byrdybyrd05
Make them pay back their scholarship in donation
Posted on 12/2/20 at 12:13 pm to ItFliesItDies
quote:
All this "transferring" whenever they feel like it with no repercussions, takes away the meaning of commitment. Now this "opt out". The game of college football is going down, slowly but surely. The new world we live in is all about spoiling.
Yeah! How dare an overpaid coach under contract with an institution leave for another head coaching job for more money! Spoiled arse brats!
Posted on 12/2/20 at 12:19 pm to TigerStripes30
quote:
Make them pay remainder of scholarship. That would stop them really quick
Would never hold up in court.
I still find it hilarious how every year colleges “make a business decision” and tell scholarship players who aren’t performing as expected to “look elsewhere” or yank scholarship offers to committed players for the same “business decision” and none of you have an issue with that but the moment any of these “players” make a “business decision” its an issue.
Hypocrisy.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 12:24 pm to lsufanva
quote:
I'll bite. Was Stingley a quitter when he decommitted from LSU as a recruit? How about Korey Foreman? Is he a quitter for decommiting from Clemson? Should we not continue to recruit him since he's a quitter? All the kids we "flip" are quitters also correct? Kids decommiting willingly is much more common than schools pushing them out. Sure are a lot of quitters in college football. But I guess in this new era of virtue signaling the kids are immune to criticism and just victims of a rigged system.
No one said it’s a “rigged system”. I’m pointing out that this “opting out” goes both ways, yet there only seems to be outrage about one side of it.
I agree with you that these players shouldn’t commit unless they are 100% certain that’s where they want to play. I also believe these schools shouldn’t be offering scholarships unless they are 100% certain that that is the player they want.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 12:41 pm to Byrdybyrd05
There are PLENTY of days I feel like "opting out of my job" - but somehow the corporation I work for, would not not react well to that.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 1:28 pm to vince vega
I don’t want quitters in my team. Good luck in the pros bubba.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 1:50 pm to lsu1919
quote:
This isn't a popular opinion but I agree. If the schools can treat players like employee's then the players can treat the school as an employer. If the employee quits, then they obviously lose access to the school, training, etc. but if that's what they choose then so be it.
This is a far from perfect system, but let's quit acting like these kids are injuring LSU in any way.
Respectfully disagree.
If this was a true employee/employer situation, LSU could go to the market and hire the next qualified candidate, same day.
But LSU can't go out and get a new receiver to replace Terrace Marshall. They can't just go sign people in the middle of the season. Marshall's spot can't be replaced until next season.
On top of that, LSU is limited to signing 25 scholarship players per year, 85 total. With the current situation, it might take almost 2 years to replace that spot.
Can you imagine if an employee quits, and the government arbitrarily says you aren't allowed to replace him for 2 years? How would you function as a business? This is why top employees are often compensated with bonuses, stock options, etc. College football players essentially get their value up front.
That absolutely harms LSU.
Posted on 12/2/20 at 1:51 pm to misey94
quote:
The reason this hasn’t already been done is Title IX. Any attempt at paying unequal amounts will result in federal lawsuits and it’s not feasible to pay all athletes what your would need to keep football and basketball players interested. There is no getting around this issue without a years long legal battle all the way to the Supreme Court that isn’t guaranteed to succeed.
Title IX - No person in the United States shall, based on sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.
What I said was name ALL student-athletes employees. How do you get a Title IX issue when ALL athletes are involved.
Further, I think you are focused on the scholarship portion. Revenue is taxed NO matter the source. So if the school compensates by even providing meals or t-shirts. It's petty as hell, but you don't think a government wouldn't put a dollar value to that "compensation" and tax the hell out of it. Tack on scholarships for ANY athlete, and the ball game changes.
With all that said, the reason why you haven't seen the employment distinction is due to Workers Compensation issues. If a employee gets hurt at work, the employer may have to cover the insurance. In sports, athletes get hurt all the time and would create a significant financial burden with numerous claims being reported and potentially causing college athletics to cease completely as we know them. That is the heart of the employment issue, not Title IX.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News