- 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: California Governor signs law that allows college athletes to get paid
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:39 pm to BamaGradinTn
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:39 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:Again I KNOW THAT!
Jeez. Again...NOT TO PAY THE PLAYERS! They have to "allow" the players to profit from their likeness.
1
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:39 pm to Vecchio Cane
quote:
They have to "allow" the players to profit from their likeness.
And thus lose their NCAA eligibility. That's all I'm saying
I get that.
These people saying that the schools are going to be banned are clueless.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:40 pm to BamaGradinTn
SMU got the death penalty in 1987.
Other schools have been banned from bowl games, USC was stripped of its national title for paying Reggie Bush.
quote:
The 1987 season was canceled; only conditioning drills (without pads) were permitted until the spring of 1988.
All home games in 1988 were canceled. The NCAA allowed SMU to play their seven regularly scheduled away games so that other institutions would not be financially affected and so that SMU could avoid uninsurable default liabilities to those schools if its failure to uphold the contractual obligation to appear for competition was not beyond the school's control. The university ultimately chose to cancel the away games and accept the uninsured "failure to appear" liability.
The team's existing probation was extended to 1990, resulting in essentially two full years of lost appearance, broadcast media, and advertising sponsorship income. Its existing ban from bowl games and live television was extended to 1989.
SMU lost 55 new scholarship positions over 4 years.
The team was allowed to hire only five full-time assistant coaches instead of the typical nine.
No off-campus recruiting was permitted until August 1988 and no paid visits could be made to campus by potential recruits until the start of the 1988–89 school year.
Other schools have been banned from bowl games, USC was stripped of its national title for paying Reggie Bush.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:40 pm to diremustang
quote:
? Does anyone really think women's lacrosse would be viable
if they moved to this model
Maybe
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:40 pm to Jbird
quote:
Jeez. Again...NOT TO PAY THE PLAYERS! They have to "allow" the players to profit from their likeness.
Again I KNOW THAT!
Then why the frick did you bring up Title IX?
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:40 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
get that. These people saying that the schools are going to be banned are clueless.
gotcha
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:41 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:Why are you using Northridge? Are you suggesting Reggie Bush wouldn't have made a sack of cash? You seem very fricking angry over this subject.
That's all you've got? An emoji? You didn't even know what the fricking law said.
We've got a bunch of clueless fricks in this thread who think that suddenly every football player at Cal State Northridge is suddenly going to make $10,000 on autographs.
Are you one of them?
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:41 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
don't get where you guys are getting this. The schools wouldn't be paying the players.
If the player sells his autograph, the player loses his eligibility. What NCAA schools have been banned for a player getting extra benefits?
It's called Lack of Institutional Control.
It is the university's responsibility to make sure their student athletes are not receiving improper benefits like selling autographs.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:42 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Jeez. Again...NOT TO PAY THE PLAYERS! They have to "allow" the players to profit from their likeness.
Wearing the team's jersey? I'd imagine without the jersey they wouldn't get much.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:42 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:ONE MORE TIME! The state government just enabled male athletes to generate more income than female athletes there is the Title IX complaint.
Then why the frick did you bring up Title IX?
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:44 pm to Jbird
quote:
That's all you've got? An emoji? You didn't even know what the fricking law said.
We've got a bunch of clueless fricks in this thread who think that suddenly every football player at Cal State Northridge is suddenly going to make $10,000 on autographs.
Are you one of them?
Why are you using Northridge? Are you suggesting Reggie Bush wouldn't have made a sack of cash? You seem very fricking angry over this subject.
Well, maybe I have little patience for idiots.
Why Northridge? Because of the other idiots talking about all the Cal schools who would have all their players be eligible. Try to keep the frick up.
And yeah, about paying players, you did say this: "The State Government just enacted that ability, therefore they are open to Title IX issues."
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:44 pm to Music_City_Tiger
The NCAA already stated that they would have to start their own league because they won't be in the NCAA anymore.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:45 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:Oh that's fricking rich.
Try to keep the frick up.
quote:No fricking shite did I really?!?
And yeah, about paying players, you did say this: "The State Government just enacted that ability, therefore they are open to Title IX issues."
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:45 pm to Jbird
quote:
Then why the frick did you bring up Title IX?
ONE MORE TIME! The state government just enabled male athletes to generate more income than female athletes there is the Title IX complaint.
You're an idiot. Title IX only comes into play if the school provides the benefit. If a car dealership hires a player to come do an event, the school isn't involved
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:46 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:Well, they can now use their own funds instead of scholarships since they'll be making endorsement cash. College just got more expensive personally for CA "affaletes".
They currently use private funds to travel to those states.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:46 pm to Jbird
And the LGBT mob will be upset too
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:46 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
Title IX only comes into play if the school provides the benefit.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:47 pm to Sidicous
I still don't see the need for any law.
It was never illegal for them to be paid.
It was never illegal for them to be paid.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:48 pm to Jbird
quote:
And yeah, about paying players, you did say this: "The State Government just enacted that ability, therefore they are open to Title IX issues."
No fricking shite did I really?!?
Jesus fricking Christ.
"
Again...THE SCHOOLS WOULDN'T BE PAYING THE PLAYERS!!!
Jeez, people, try to keep up.
The State Government just enacted that ability, therefore they are open to Title IX issues."
Yeah,you said it gave the university the ability to play the players. So go frick yourself. It says no such thing.
Posted on 9/30/19 at 12:50 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:I frickING KNOW THAT YOU frickING IDIOT!
Again...THE SCHOOLS WOULDN'T BE PAYING THE PLAYERS!!!
quote:No you fricking idiot I said they opened the ability for the players to get paid. TRY TO frickING KEEP UP!
Yeah,you said it gave the university the ability to play the players. So go frick yourself. It says no such thing.
Page 4 of 7
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News