Nick Saban Vs NDSU

[NDSU92]

What in particular are you mad about? What is the money being spent on that you don't agree with?

If I’m mad at anyone it’s the people who are angry with athletes for asking that they get compensated at market-driven rates. There’s a whole lot of “free market when I want it, subsidy and monopoly when I don’t” logic going on in sports. Across all levels.

The NCAA could spend a lot less on lawyers and organizational bureaucracy. That would be a good start.

[NI4NI]

If I’m mad at anyone it’s the people who are angry with athletes for asking that they get compensated at market-driven rates. There’s a whole lot of “free market when I want it, subsidy and monopoly when I don’t” logic going on in sports. Across all levels.

The NCAA could spend a lot less on lawyers and organizational bureaucracy. That would be a good start.

I was hoping that you would have something more specific that I could get on board with you on. But your reply was too vague for that.

One area that I think we do disagree on is the player compensation. I'm not against it, but I sure don't like the mindset that "o the poor kids should get paid for all of their hard work" nonsense. It's not a job, it's college. If their contribution warrants them to share in NIL, then wonderful. But the idea that every athlete in every sport better get compensated is utter nonsense and obviously unsustainable.

[NDSU92]

I was hoping that you would have something more specific that I could get on board with you on. But your reply was too vague for that.

One area that I think we do disagree on is the player compensation. I'm not against it, but I sure don't like the mindset that "o the poor kids should get paid for all of their hard work" nonsense. It's not a job, it's college. If their contribution warrants them to share in NIL, then wonderful. But the idea that every athlete in every sport better get compensated is utter nonsense and obviously unsustainable.

You’re disagreeing about market driven compensation and then go on to explain that you’re okay with market driven compensation…

Again, we’re talking about less than 1% of college athletes will ever see additional compensation. The hysteria around allowing them to have the ability to get paid is an overreaction. The biggest problem I have is the NCAA creates all these NIL rules so that for a school to even be in the conversation about paying athletes they have to jump through all these hoops and spend all this money just to set a program up.

That has many effects, all of which support the powerful schools and their administrators: 1) smaller schools couldn’t dream of NIL, 2) larger schools can know which corners to cut without being punished, 3) at any time the larger schools can band together and change the rules if they see something they can’t control 4) depresses the market to reduce the amount they have to pay their players, 5) creates hundreds more administrative positions than are necessary, etc.

Just let people pay the workers lol

[NI4NI]

You’re disagreeing about market driven compensation and then go on to explain that you’re okay with market driven compensation…

Again, we’re talking about less than 1% of college athletes will ever see additional compensation. The hysteria around allowing them to have the ability to get paid is an overreaction. The biggest problem I have is the NCAA creates all these NIL rules so that for a school to even be in the conversation about paying athletes they have to jump through all these hoops and spend all this money just to set a program up.

That has many effects, all of which support the powerful schools and their administrators: 1) smaller schools couldn’t dream of NIL, 2) larger schools can know which corners to cut without being punished, 3) at any time the larger schools can band together and change the rules if they see something they can’t control 4) depresses the market to reduce the amount they have to pay their players, 5) creates hundreds more administrative positions than are necessary, etc.

Just let people pay the workers lol

I would love to see these rules before debating them.

And we are in lock step regarding WASTING money on positions that should be going to students. When you say "Hundreds" are you referring to per school? or across all colleges total?

[tony]

OK, you might want to bookmark this for being one of the dumbest takes in the history of Bisonville (drum roll):

I think with the NIL is going to hurt of lot of power programs while benefiting others. My reasoning is that many of these schools had unscrupulous boosters giving recruits and their families relatively small amounts of money, cars, or real estate. Now that advantage is gone. And if your football program is in a state like Alabama with a bottom 5 median household income, then the football program is going to have to rely on big donors. But what do the very wealthy want more than anything else? More money and more power, that's what. They get neither by donating to an NIL (and I think there should be big pushback on making this a tax shelter) - and we're talking a lot of money every year forever.

I just don't think that huge NILs are going to be sustainable - I mean, minor league pro teams don't get boosters handing out millions every year, so I wouldn't expect that a college-branded semi-pro football league of 64 teams would either in the long run. And if they go the super level of college football, you'd think that there'd be one TV deal, not one for each conference which would be another advantage gone for SEC schools. Not to mention that if grandpa starts pissing away their grandkids' inheritances on this kind of stuff, things could get ugly in a hurry.

[tony]

I think it actually makes a lot of sense. If you want to limit crazy movement you need to find ways to make it less appealing. They could do what they have done for FBS and add a huge fee. Or do like some conferences do and add an exit fee. I like the post-season ban because it doesn't cost the school any money directly, but it makes them think long and hard if the move is worthwhile. There are all kinds of incentives and disincentives for many things in life. This is just another example.

It makes sense if you believe that the NCAA exists to cater to the power schools, but that's not in the NCAA's mission statement ("govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount.")

Keeping track athletes from competing in NCAA meets because of something their school did has nothing to do with sportsmanship or the experience of the student-athlete (imo) - it's the opposite, those rules are in place solely to appease big schools.

[NI4NI]

OK, you might want to bookmark this for being one of the dumbest takes in the history of Bisonville (drum roll):

I think with the NIL is going to hurt of lot of power programs while benefiting others. My reasoning is that many of these schools had unscrupulous boosters giving recruits and their families relatively small amounts of money, cars, or real estate. Now that advantage is gone. And if your football program is in a state like Alabama with a bottom 5 median household income, then the football program is going to have to rely on big donors. But what do the very wealthy want more than anything else? More money and more power, that's what. They get neither by donating to an NIL (and I think there should be big pushback on making this a tax shelter) - and we're talking a lot of money every year forever.

I just don't think that huge NILs are going to be sustainable - I mean, minor league pro teams don't get boosters handing out millions every year, so I wouldn't expect that a college-branded semi-pro football league of 64 teams would either in the long run. And if they go the super level of college football, you'd think that there'd be one TV deal, not one for each conference which would be another advantage gone for SEC schools. Not to mention that if grandpa starts pissing away their grandkids' inheritances on this kind of stuff, things could get ugly in a hurry.

I don't think that is a dumb take at all.
How likely it is that it actually plays out that way? That's the million dollar question.

Regarding the tax shelter, I don't believe donations to a NIL collective is deductible.

[Gully]

I think it’s a big stretch to say that not arbitrarily taking their postseasons away is coddling them.

As far as the rest of the NIL and transfer stuff, if you like collegiate athletics so much why are you angry that the athletes are fighting for their position?

Athletic administrators have been expanding their power exponentially during all of this and no one seems to bat an eye at that. If you think collegiate athletics is being ruined, start with them. They are the reason conferences are imploding, NIL $ is concentrating the power into the hands of the few, etc. Athletes are just the pawns and a minuscule, minuscule amount will take home more than you or I will this year.

Did you mean to quote me with some of your response? I'm not angry but you sound angry. Maybe you're projecting?

I'm just saying are they 'kids' in college or employees competing in a free market for jobs? It seems like some want it both ways.

[56BISON73]

OK, you might want to bookmark this for being one of the dumbest takes in the history of Bisonville (drum roll):

I think with the NIL is going to hurt of lot of power programs while benefiting others. My reasoning is that many of these schools had unscrupulous boosters giving recruits and their families relatively small amounts of money, cars, or real estate. Now that advantage is gone. And if your football program is in a state like Alabama with a bottom 5 median household income, then the football program is going to have to rely on big donors. But what do the very wealthy want more than anything else? More money and more power, that's what. They get neither by donating to an NIL (and I think there should be big pushback on making this a tax shelter) - and we're talking a lot of money every year forever.

I just don't think that huge NILs are going to be sustainable - I mean, minor league pro teams don't get boosters handing out millions every year, so I wouldn't expect that a college-branded semi-pro football league of 64 teams would either in the long run. And if they go the super level of college football, you'd think that there'd be one TV deal, not one for each conference which would be another advantage gone for SEC schools. Not to mention that if grandpa starts pissing away their grandkids' inheritances on this kind of stuff, things could get ugly in a hurry.

Look what happened to FSU.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...20for%20Atkins.

[reformedUNDfan]

Look what happened to FSU.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...20for%20Atkins.

Between the CFP, the bowl game and this, FSU has had an awful six weeks