re: Supreme Court Ruling…Possibly the best day of my life.

quote:

---

You can pay the players all the money you want, they will still have to perform on the field.

---

Better paid players will tend to be the better athletes. Just a wild prediction.

How do you think the sport works now?

quote:

---

I will never complain about paying players neither should any professed LSU fan.

We are a top 5 elite athletic department. We can pay with the best. If I were Nebraska or South Carolina or NC State maybe then I'd be worried

---

While an understandable position, the question then becomes who and how much? Which will lead to other issues such as can the schools afford to pay student-athletes AND maintain the current status of services delivered without significantly increasing the expense to the consumer (you and me).

Does the star QB get paid more than the 4th team safety who never plays? He does in a pure market-based system. Understandably, as his market value to the organization is SIGNIFICANTLY higher. But this isn't a pure capitalistic system. We have Title IX and "fairness" issues to address. And the reality is football players will likely have to be paid the exact same as end of the bench female golfers. That, despite the fact football and basketball (and in limited situations, baseball) are the ONLY profitable sports on campus.

It will almost assuredly create a de facto socialist system on campus. The Joe Burrow's, Cam Thomas's, Dylan Crew's of the world are going to be paid SIGNIFICANTLY less than their true "market value" while members of the diving team or soccer team will be paid WELL over their true market value. That, or LSU will have to significantly increase revenue from the high revenue sports in order to both pay the star football players closer to market value in addition to paying the same for non-revenue producing athletes. ALL while continuing to pay exorbitant coaching salaries and facility/amenities costs in the never ending arms race that aren't going to decrease.

IMO, I think what it will create down the line is LESS opportunities for kids to play collegiate sports. Depending on what the "salaries" are, paying athletes could be a very big expense. To cover it you may see schools start to significantly streamline their athletic departments by cutting non-revenue producing sports (if possible). In a capitalistic world much of that would be women's sports. But title IX is going to prevent that from happening. Thus, there may come a day where the only male sports a school like LSU offers is football, basketball and baseball. For other less profitable athletic depts you may see them offer even LESS sports

I get the players' argument. And it is a very reasonable one. But these kinds of decisions don't exist in a vacuum. There will be a butterfly effect perhaps some aren't looking at right now.

quote:

---

The Joe Burrow's, Cam Thomas's, Dylan Crew's of the world are going to be paid SIGNIFICANTLY less than their true "market value"

---

On Crews I would say absolutely. College baseball just doesn't have the reach for him to make money on jersey sales or other likeness revenue.

The Burrow's will be selling jerseys and making whatever their take on each one is hand over fist.

The Cam's will have shoe deals and making some money on that as well. I actually think this could help some college guys with development in the game by staying in school. I'm not saying this will be the case for all the stars but it could be for some.

quote:

---

Better paid players will tend to be the better athletes. Just a wild prediction.

---

Which leads to a lot of transfers.

You know, there weren’t many student athletes complaining about not being paid because the video game character looked like them. In fact, most of them LOVED it and played the game religiously.

Until Ed Obannon, a bitter, broke, former student athlete saw his likeness in a basketball game while hanging out at his “homies” house playing video games.

This guy made millions in his short NBA career and has a net worth of $100,000. He was not as good of a basketball player as he thinks, and playing on a really good team wearing UCLA on his chest made him that money, not the other way around.

Again, frick people like him

They are still Aggies with ghey arse traditions.

I dont think this means what you think it means.

“ The decision allows schools to provide their athletes with unlimited compensation as long as it is some way connected to their education.”

quote:

---

quote:
The Supreme Court Ruling this morning means we are ONE STEP CLOSER TO NOT HAVING AMATEUR COLLEGE ATHLETICS.

FIFY

---

Yep, big time college athletics is a joke.