Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

I was right

2

Comments

  • WoolleyDoog
    WoolleyDoog Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 5,833 Founders Club
    edited January 17

    Seems pretty simple to more or less resolve the way it should have always been done. Take it back to where the collective basically is dispersed evenly. Want to donate? You're donating across the board, but then just open up NIL opportunities that are legitimate and have to be vetted by the NCAA. Amazon or Adidas or Beacon fucking Plumbing wants to do endorsements with Penix and Odunze, sure. Or Dr. Pepper wants Quinn Ewers in an ad, sure. Crypt keeper wants to pay someone's shitball dad and fake agent just to go to their program. Fuck off. Sanctions.

    The female athletes would do better with this than some might think as there are more female Olympic athlete types in the NCAA than you think and they are 100x better at being influencers.

  • PurpleThrobber
    PurpleThrobber Member Posts: 48,657 Standard Supporter
    edited January 17

    I'd do it the other way. You want to play at an NCAA institution? OK, your fee to play for Alma Mater State is x% of your taxable income which goes into a fund which pays all athletes equally (so you get a little rebate). Without the school logo, you ain't shit.

    Make as much fucking money as you want - just know that if you want to don a uniform within the NCAA, there's an admittance fee.

    Kids get charged up the ying yang to play on AAU and travel teams. Why not?

  • AtomicDawg
    AtomicDawg Member Posts: 7,360

    They'll just license the logos. What's interesting is how the kids that are not nfl or high level college players pivot.

    If they don't have a scholarship and are just an employee that's some major disruption for the kids that actually play school.

  • Joey
    Joey Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 7,563 Founders Club

    I side with ALL women

  • DoubleJDawg
    DoubleJDawg Member Posts: 637

    Totally agree on licensing - that's absolutely where it's ending up

    The scholarship can/should be a specific benefit which can end up in the packages of kids who want it — it could even be a future benefit (it's yours to use sometime within 5-10 years of end of playing career), it could be a partial/discounted scholarship, etc.

    That said, I know we love to marvel at the (university-established, price gouging level) "price" of a scholarship but the actual marginal cost of that a scholarship to a big state school is pretty negligible. I'm betting many/most serious big schools will consider that table stakes or a throw-in to pretty much every deal, particularly if they assume that not 100% of the players of the future will actually use the benefit (which they certainly won't, once they decouple "eligibility" from participation)

  • DoogmanRefund
    DoogmanRefund Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 1,245 Swaye's Wigwam

    It really feels like they aren’t students at all anymore. It seems like it used to be a pain in the ass academically in getting transfers in. I can’t remember the last time I heard about a Vernon Adams who can’t math or a guy being unable to transfer because the school doesn’t have a PE program.

  • Quietcowskee
    Quietcowskee Member Posts: 4,410 Standard Supporter
    edited January 17

    Why are football and basketball even attached to the universities any more? Who are we kidding? The world laughs at us. And I laugh at their laughing.