I’m no lawyer (or doctor) but on the surface this looks like a pretty good bill.
Lol….10-20%……these kids are being so taken advantage of…
1 Like
You’re not kidding. That’s insane.
Makes you think that a free college education might inform them of that insane percentage
1 Like
Specifically for hockey, I have a hard time believing that CHL kids are just now becoming aware of the NCAA option.
It’s been all over the news for a couple of years and was implemented around the start of last season.
So did the CHL, Canadian media or players’ advisors withhold the truth or downplay the possibility? If it’s the latter (and I think that’s at least part of it), those people should no longer be in those positions.
1 Like
I can’t believe it takes legislation to make that so.
2 Likes
To me it seems to ban the use of student fees to support athletics in any manner. Student fees account for a HUGE percentage of Miami’s athletic budget.
1 Like
I don’t see Miami being affected by the student fee prohibition as the school would have to earn 50 million in media money before it kicks in. I don’t think Miami earns anywhere close to 50
Million a year.
3 Likes
In that case this is a nothing burger. Only the SEC and Big Ten, on average, distribute more than $50m in media. And they only report 1% of revenue is sourced from student fees in those conferences. I’m sure it wouldn’t take much for a FSB second year accounting student to figure out how to shuffle around the money.
I can’t imagine any context where increased federal government intrusion into college athletics leads to an increased positive outcome for students, let alone the entire enterprise
I can readily see a patchwork of state laws leading to even more competitive imbalance. Congressional action could lead to a more level playing field.
There are ways a patchwork could lead to utterly insane results, too. Suppose CA passes a law saying college athletes are employees. Suppose OH passes a law saying they aren’t. This means USC and UCLA football players are eligible for worker’s comp, and Ohio State football players aren’t. These people are all doing the same thing in the same conference!
Would there be any impact when those Ohio State players are within the state of California for a road game? What if they get hurt there during the game?
Definitely a potential for that. Also, there are very liberal rules in California about worker’s comp eligibility for injuries while employed outside the state so long as the employment relationship was entered into in California.
Take, for example, CJ Stroud of Rancho Cucamonga. He was presumably physically present in California when he accepted his offer to play for Ohio State. If CA considers student-athletes to be employees, and CJ Stroud enters into employment (under CA law) with Ohio State while in California, then Ohio State might be on the hook for any injury he suffers on the field while playing for the Buckeyes.
EDIT: I’m just using Stroud as an example; I don’t think there’s a possibility for him personally to do this given the current state of the law.
2 Likes
I think the concern maybe instituting student fees to cover the new costs of the NIL payments. While the vast majority of these schools don’t currently have student fees they are also operating at or near break even.
100% agree on no student fees covering NIL. I’ve seen enough of those things (to date) to say they would have qualified for the SMU death penalty in the 80s. Lol
Revenue sharing seems like it has a better chance of being “cleaner”, however, I really think this whole thing is about two conferences setting themselves apart into the “untouchable” territory and fuck everyone else
Interesting that Senator Maria Cantwell has sent a letter to the House that the ACT needs work. Says the way it is the rich get richer and hurts the smaller schools. Maybe she is looking out for her alma mater
2 Likes