- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Free Enterprise has entered College athletics
Posted on 12/9/24 at 7:19 pm to prepsportsallday
Posted on 12/9/24 at 7:19 pm to prepsportsallday
quote:
I find it more bizarre that a "fan" doesn't want them to get paid.
Because it was just fine the way it was and the sport is spiraling downward.
quote:
My post is directed to fans that have a problem with athletes being paid.
Not athletes. College athletes that haven’t earned shite.
quote:
What evidence do you have of this
The evidence is right in front of you. There’s zero loyalty to anyone or anything anymore and it’s sad
quote:
We have to recognize that there cannot be relationships unless there is commitment, unless there is loyalty, unless there is love, patience, persistence.” —Cornel West
quote:
But I'm not for the athlete forfeiting eligibility just because he changed schools.
Only one transfer should be allowed or you forfeit a year. Nobody’s wants TJ Finleys and Dillon Gabriels in college football
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 7:21 pm
1
Posted on 12/9/24 at 9:10 pm to prepsportsallday
quote:My point has nothing to do with NIL. And they have the right to "go pro," just not the right to play in the NFL. If someone will pay them to play football, they have every right to do that. Most semi-pro leagues have an age minimum of only 18. Don't even need a HS diploma or GED.
Remember, not every player is deserving of NIL. Some are entitled to more, others less. Not every guy is willing on ready to go pro. For those that are able, they should have the right to do so.
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 9:42 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 10:58 pm to Gravitiger
quote:
My point has nothing to do with NIL. And they have the right to "go pro," just not the right to play in the NFL. If someone will pay them to play football, they have every right to do that. Most semi-pro leagues have an age minimum of only 18. Don't even need a HS diploma or GED.
All valid points. At the end of the day, the current system (and my post) is all about NIL, which exists because of the long standing rules prohibiting athletes from profiting form their NIL. The current system may not be perfect, but better than taking away the right all together.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:04 pm to Howyouluhdat
quote:
Because it was just fine the way it was
It was obviously not fine for someone.
quote:
the sport is spiraling downward.
Downward? Try again. lol Viewership has skyrocketed this year.
Total viewership across Nielsen-rated platforms in 2024 reached 18.7 million, a fivefold gain from the 2023 season. Link
quote:
Not athletes. College athletes that haven’t earned shite.
Yes college athletes, who own their name and image. If a private company wants to pay a "college athlete" for the use of their name, image, or likeness, then then they should be able to. The college athlete whose name is known through the country has done enough to be known through out the country. What he has done to accomplish this has been "earned".
quote:
The evidence is right in front of you. There’s zero loyalty to anyone or anything anymore and it’s sad
Maybe the system could use some improvement. Everything goes through stages.
quote:
Only one transfer should be allowed or you forfeit a year. Nobody’s wants TJ Finleys and Dillon Gabriels in college football
I hear you. 3 schools have literally wanted TJ Finley.
This post was edited on 12/9/24 at 11:12 pm
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:15 pm to Howyouluhdat
quote:
It’s a meaningless game vs fighting for freedom? Who wants to voluntarily die in a meaningless game?
Ok
quote:
Who? What High School player is more developed than his 27yr old counterpart in the NFL? If there is one then they are the exception
Yes they are the exception. My comments have been directed to the exceptions. And yes, I've seen 17 years olds that were far more developed than guys much older. I've seen and met Fournette, who at 17 yrs old was bigger and stronger than many RBs much older than him.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:17 pm to moneyg
quote:
Free enterprise would involve the ability to sign players to contracts.
I'm talking about the athletes right to accept compensation from private businesses, not from the schools. NIL already involves contracts. Mostly advertsing.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:18 pm to Roaad
quote:
The market is the consumer, don't overthink it.
And the end consumer of football, not liking NIL, losing interest in the sport, stops buying tickets, stops watching on television, and not buying merch.. . .would all be the market reacting to the product.
That hypothetical would also be a strong market force that would end in the elimination of NIL
I enjoyed this season even more than ever. I'm not the only one.
ESPN platforms delivered record-breaking college football viewership in 2024, with ABC owning the season as the No. 1 network for college football, averaging 5.8 million viewers for 46 regular season games, an impressive 56 percent increase year-over-year and ABC’s best college football season in 15 years (since 2009). ESPN platforms scored their most-watched season since 2016 with an average of 1.9 million viewers per game across all Nielsen-rated networks (ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU) – a 19 percent increase year-over-year. LINK
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 6:26 am
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:19 pm to MikeTheTiger71
quote:
I agree with that perspective, but the near impossibility of separating out true NIL from pay for play was the reason for regulations against NIL in the first place. The NCAA should have admitted defeat on that front when forced by the courts to allow NIL and stopped pretending that it wouldn’t morph into pay for play as they had always said it would to justify not allowing it in the first place,
I agree.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:34 pm to prepsportsallday
But you suggested NIL is the market force that the consumer should just deal with
I was pointing out the absolute fact that NIL is not the market, but an instigating force within the product, whereas the consumer is the market that directs the force and applies 100% of the pressure
If the consumer dislikes NIL so much that they would stop watching, CFB would have to eliminate NIL or disappear, true or false?
Look at what happened with the NFL and all the overt race-baiting/BLM/kneeling/etc. ratings and attendance began to falter, so the product was corrected to maintain the market.
With team sports, the game is the product, players are performers, coaches are directors, execs are the producers, but the paying consumer is the market
Free markets can only work when the customer sets the price. Anytime that isn't true (even the tiniest bit), it isn't a free market. You would do well to remember that when engaging in discussions where you are using economic analogies.
I was pointing out the absolute fact that NIL is not the market, but an instigating force within the product, whereas the consumer is the market that directs the force and applies 100% of the pressure
If the consumer dislikes NIL so much that they would stop watching, CFB would have to eliminate NIL or disappear, true or false?
Look at what happened with the NFL and all the overt race-baiting/BLM/kneeling/etc. ratings and attendance began to falter, so the product was corrected to maintain the market.
With team sports, the game is the product, players are performers, coaches are directors, execs are the producers, but the paying consumer is the market
Free markets can only work when the customer sets the price. Anytime that isn't true (even the tiniest bit), it isn't a free market. You would do well to remember that when engaging in discussions where you are using economic analogies.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:50 pm to Roaad
quote:
But you suggested NIL is the market force that the consumer should just deal with
I think said that for the athlete that wants profits his name, entities that want to pay for that is the market.
And of course CFB has a market.
Viewership of CFB is reportedly "5 folds" higher than 2023. I'll be watching for "market correction". Watching and still enjoying.
Posted on 12/9/24 at 11:52 pm to prepsportsallday
quote:But again, that is an agitating force within the market proper.
I think said that for the athlete that wants profits his name, entities that want to pay for that is the market.
Being an agitating force isn't necessarily bad or good, it just mucks with the product.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:06 am to Roaad
quote:
But again, that is an agitating force within the market proper.
You keep referring to "the market", while I'm referring to a different market. Now the entities looking to pay NIL monies may be "a market" which is an agitating force within the "CFB market". But there is a market for the use of the athletes name, image, and likeness. But otherwise, we are on the same page.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:15 am to prepsportsallday
quote:The CFB market
You keep referring to "the market"
When you say NIL isn't going anywhere, you are making a statement about the end consumer's need to "deal with it"
Which tells me you lack understanding of what the market is, and who decides what.
If the market decided they don't like NIL, what happens to NIL?
Posted on 12/10/24 at 12:42 am to Roaad
quote:
If the market decided they don't like NIL, what happens to NIL?
NIL is a matter of legalities. The courts have spoken on this. The players right to profit from his name has been recognized by the courts. This not just about economic principle, but legally recognized rights.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:08 am to prepsportsallday
quote:No one is talking about legally taking away NIL. Your OP was about forcing the NFL to allow high school seniors to be drafted and create a developmental league for them.
All valid points. At the end of the day, the current system (and my post) is all about NIL, which exists because of the long standing rules prohibiting athletes from profiting form their NIL. The current system may not be perfect, but better than taking away the right all together.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:29 am
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:11 am to prepsportsallday
quote:Dude, your link/quote is about the National Women's Soccer League. Did you even read it before posting?
I enjoyed this season even more than ever. I'm not the only one.
Total viewership across Nielsen-rated platforms in 2024 reached 18.7 million, a fivefold gain from the 2023 season. Link
Think about it: Do you really think CFB viewership went up 500% year-over-year, or that there were only 19MM total viewers all season? The SECCG alone probably had that many.
To quote yourself: "Try again. Lol."
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:27 am
Posted on 12/10/24 at 4:16 am to prepsportsallday
quote:The courts have actually not spoken on a player's right to profit from NIL, other than in dicta in a concurring opinion in the Alston case. State statutes gave them that ability.
NIL is a matter of legalities. The courts have spoken on this. The players right to profit from his name has been recognized by the courts. This not just about economic principle, but legally recognized rights.
This post was edited on 12/10/24 at 4:19 am
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:23 am to Gravitiger
quote:
No one is talking about legally taking away NIL. Your OP was about forcing the NFL to allow high school seniors to be drafted and create a developmental league for them
I hear you. The NFL minor league might seem far fetched, but I think it's an interesting concept.
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:27 am to Gravitiger
quote:
Dude, your link/quote is about the National Women's Soccer League. Did you even read it before posting?
Think about it: Do you really think CFB viewership went up 500% year-over-year, or that there were only 19MM total viewers all season? The SECCG alone probably had that many.
To quote yourself: "Try again. Lol."
No you're right. I corrected that crap lol!!
But there has been an increase in viewership.
ESPN platforms delivered record-breaking college football viewership in 2024, with ABC owning the season as the No. 1 network for college football, averaging 5.8 million viewers for 46 regular season games, an impressive 56 percent increase year-over-year and ABC’s best college football season in 15 years (since 2009). ESPN platforms scored their most-watched season since 2016 with an average of 1.9 million viewers per game across all Nielsen-rated networks (ABC, ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNU) – a 19 percent increase year-over-year. LINK
Posted on 12/10/24 at 6:41 am to prepsportsallday
This isn’t “free enterprise.” Markets are supposed to clear. What is happening here is that prices are being bid up because the system is flush with cash. Unrestricted free agency means players just move on to the next highest bidder whenever they want. There is no approach to equilibrium, the price just keeps going up and up and up.
This situation is not unique to college athletics. This is the asset bubble we see in real estate, private equity and the price inflation in commodities. Anyone who thinks we’ve seen free enterprise in America the last decade and a half is mistaken.
This situation is not unique to college athletics. This is the asset bubble we see in real estate, private equity and the price inflation in commodities. Anyone who thinks we’ve seen free enterprise in America the last decade and a half is mistaken.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News