SCOTUS Backs Student Athletes 9-0

[Zan15]

This is the tough part: some schools/sports/programs clearly have the ability to pay their athletes. There are lots that definitely don't. As a labor matter, I think college athletes 100% deserve to be paid- but where the money comes from is a huge issue, for a number of reasons.

I want the athletes that bring in revenue and prestige to the programs to be compensated for it...but I also don't want Hannah at the U of Montana to pay more in tuition for her biology degree in order to make sure athletes are getting paid. If I could snap my fingers and grant colleges millions of additional dollars in funding, there are lots of things core to the mission of a university that I would spend the money on before athletics.

So what if the programs that could actually afford it were the only ones paying? Well...you think competitiveness in college sports is top-heavy and dynastic now...just wait and see what happens when top programs are able to lure top recruits with higher compensation packages.



This is essentially the root of the problem. NFL and NBA (in particular) don't have a farm system. Players that want to play pro go through college, and may not even be particularly interested in the actual "college" parts, but they don't have a choice.

Oh i agree funding of sports should never come from non sports sources in a college.

Also professional sports figured this out by instituting salary caps and limits.

NFL and NBA did have a farm system called college, that allowed them to avoid most of the cost of having a real farm system

[Low Hanging Fruit]

I am happy for the athletes. Worried about what will come up with it. Pretty much a university can now give things to kids for educational purposes. Where does it stop I wonder? On the surface it sounds very reasonable. You know here is a laptop, supplies, books, and maybe some extra help from some people. But could it become here is a car to get to class. Here is an house where you can study better. Make no bones about it these things have been happening at most of the major university sporting programs for years now. Just it was done in dark rooms and the money had to stay hidden. So now that it will be allowed more in the open will it be a case of the rich get richer because they can just throw houses, cars, and whatever they determines "helps education" at kids so their programs become power houses and when kids don't work out, get injured, or don't produce suddenly they find them being yanked away from them? So yeah, I am happy for the kids because they deserve to get a piece of that massive pie they are making for universities for free. I only hope that the hidden dark side of the sport doesn't suddenly explode to mainstream.

[Breccia]

I taught at Penn State during that time. You know. That one. Yeah. So already my opinion is tainted, because I'm not a big fan of how some schools prefer athlete-students to student-athletes. Since this conflict appears to involve the former, my gut instinct was to say "fuck them both, you should be in school to learn".

But.

I'm also fully aware that the cost to go to college has risen disproportionately. Until the US wises up and makes it more affordable, even free if possible (not in my lifetime but dare to dream) then I'll take any victory the students can get. I've seen too many students forced to leave my class and/or the school because of money problems. It never gets any easier. So for now, I'll take "courts give victory to students over XXX" I'll probably cheer, regardless of the XXX.

And that's more important than my personal disdain of the NCAA or the related issues at hand.

P.S. Fuck you textbook industry, fuck you Texas and what you did to the textbook industry.

[Krakan]

Wouldn't it just make more sense to ban schools from running professional teams and having it be privatized? Why is higher education and professional athletics paired together constantly they dont seem to be related.

[PACOX]

I am happy for the athletes. Worried about what will come up with it. Pretty much a university can now give things to kids for educational purposes. Where does it stop I wonder? On the surface it sounds very reasonable. You know here is a laptop, supplies, books, and maybe some extra help from some people. But could it become here is a car to get to class. Here is an house where you can study better. Make no bones about it these things have been happening at most of the major university sporting programs for years now. Just it was done in dark rooms and the money had to stay hidden. So now that it will be allowed more in the open will it be a case of the rich get richer because they can just throw houses, cars, and whatever they determines "helps education" at kids so their programs become power houses and when kids don't work out, get injured, or don't produce suddenly they find them being yanked away from them? So yeah, I am happy for the kids because they deserve to get a piece of that massive pie they are making for universities for free. I only hope that the hidden dark side of the sport doesn't suddenly explode to mainstream.

Your concern is what was already happening and the problem but to a degree. Under the table deals happen but aren't as big as people may think. There's too many eyes and too many people waiting to blow a whistle for an athlete to really profit from. Also it benefits all the NCAA schools to 'play by the rules' to keep athletes from demanding. "Sorry Steve, we can't pay for your bus ticket home this summer because that would be against governing rules".

I've known quite a few student athletes, some big ones too. They receive cool perks but all directly tied to the athletic department and keeping the athletes chained to the athletic department. Priority in a particular dining hall, a separate gym with more experienced trainers (though they really weren't allowed to work out if not part of training anyway), free gear from sports clothing brands, access to all kinds of nutrition/workout products ie protein shakes or whatever. Housing 'could' be part of your scholarship but that also applied to academic scholarships.

I received more in free software as an STEM student than the Nike gear athletes received on top of a lot less restrictions. If I wanted 5 copies of every OS I got it no questions ask. If the department prospered, students reaped some sort of perfect even if it was just free (legal) Photoshop keys. I had professors who would help students pay for a computer/books/access codes in exchange basically being a secretary for the professor are just as poor as the next student but couldn't take up such offers without getting in trouble with their athletic department (a NCAA proxy)

Need help? They have to go through NCAA rules that serve the interests of the NCAA.

The ruling gives athletes freedom away from the NCAA/athletetic department. An athlete does not have worry about accepting the ticket for a bus ride home that their mom's job might have given her a loan for just so her child can visit home for the summer. They don't have to worry about anyone looking to report them for taking home a pizza a local pizza place might have gave them after a game (a smart place would obviously know how to get around the rules but I think you get my point).

Bit of a side story. Everyone once in a while there's a story about an athlete stealing something that doesn't make sense. Like the one who 'stole' crab legs from a store. The 'theft' is often a cover up for receiving a gift. They can't just say 'the manager said I could have the food/clothes/whatever" because they may lose their eligibility, get the school find, a bunch of other stuff. Easier to eat the charge, feed the press some nonsense, get the charges dismissed/whatever.

Basically Ii the NCAA actually want to be able to shower athletes in gifts then they would have been doing it. They wanted the opposite. An ecosystem where athletes couldn't receive various forms of compensation (outside of the little bit that was allowed) and thus wouldn't demand various forms of compensation when schools profited on the athletes likeness and success.

Know what athletes were getting before? Free Nike gear, but mostly shorts, t-shirts, and accessories. Nothing too fancy. Free protein bars and shakes from various companies that they usually couldn't use half the time because their trainer had them on a program. Special tutors that in some instances were paid off behind the athletes back to do stuff that only hurts the athletes in long run but maximizes the amount of time the athlete can dedicate to their sport. Common practice is to persuade athletes into BS majors/courses (young naive first gen students don't know better) so education does not get in the way. Tell athletes they can only live in certain places to better control/influence the athletes activities - bonus if these places cost more than other alternatives as to take advantage of scholarships.

The NCAA was stripping athletes of outside aid/support while setting what they allowed internally at a calculated minimum.

[Endus]

Wouldn't it just make more sense to ban schools from running professional teams and having it be privatized? Why is higher education and professional athletics paired together constantly they dont seem to be related.

They aren't "professional teams", by definition.

Also, the pairing-together is entirely an American thing. It does not exist outside the USA. While there are university team sports, they're pretty much irrelevant to anyone not interested in the sport. I couldn't tell you the names of the teams at any of the schools I attended, let alone any players or coaches.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

Your concern is what was already happening and the problem but to a degree. Under the table deals happen but aren't as big as people may think. There's too many eyes and too many people waiting to blow a whistle for an athlete to really profit from. Also it benefits all the NCAA schools to 'play by the rules' to keep athletes from demanding. "Sorry Steve, we can't pay for your bus ticket home this summer because that would be against governing rules".

I've known quite a few student athletes, some big ones too. They receive cool perks but all directly tied to the athletic department and keeping the athletes chained to the athletic department. Priority in a particular dining hall, a separate gym with more experienced trainers (though they really weren't allowed to work out if not part of training anyway), free gear from sports clothing brands, access to all kinds of nutrition/workout products ie protein shakes or whatever. Housing 'could' be part of your scholarship but that also applied to academic scholarships.

I received more in free software as an STEM student than the Nike gear athletes received on top of a lot less restrictions. If I wanted 5 copies of every OS I got it no questions ask. If the department prospered, students reaped some sort of perfect even if it was just free (legal) Photoshop keys. I had professors who would help students pay for a computer/books/access codes in exchange basically being a secretary for the professor are just as poor as the next student but couldn't take up such offers without getting in trouble with their athletic department (a NCAA proxy)

Need help? They have to go through NCAA rules that serve the interests of the NCAA.

The ruling gives athletes freedom away from the NCAA/athletetic department. An athlete does not have worry about accepting the ticket for a bus ride home that their mom's job might have given her a loan for just so her child can visit home for the summer. They don't have to worry about anyone looking to report them for taking home a pizza a local pizza place might have gave them after a game (a smart place would obviously know how to get around the rules but I think you get my point).

Bit of a side story. Everyone once in a while there's a story about an athlete stealing something that doesn't make sense. Like the one who 'stole' crab legs from a store. The 'theft' is often a cover up for receiving a gift. They can't just say 'the manager said I could have the food/clothes/whatever" because they may lose their eligibility, get the school find, a bunch of other stuff. Easier to eat the charge, feed the press some nonsense, get the charges dismissed/whatever.

Basically Ii the NCAA actually want to be able to shower athletes in gifts then they would have been doing it. They wanted the opposite. An ecosystem where athletes couldn't receive various forms of compensation (outside of the little bit that was allowed) and thus wouldn't demand various forms of compensation when schools profited on the athletes likeness and success.

Know what athletes were getting before? Free Nike gear, but mostly shorts, t-shirts, and accessories. Nothing too fancy. Free protein bars and shakes from various companies that they usually couldn't use half the time because their trainer had them on a program. Special tutors that in some instances were paid off behind the athletes back to do stuff that only hurts the athletes in long run but maximizes the amount of time the athlete can dedicate to their sport. Common practice is to persuade athletes into BS majors/courses (young naive first gen students don't know better) so education does not get in the way. Tell athletes they can only live in certain places to better control/influence the athletes activities - bonus if these places cost more than other alternatives as to take advantage of scholarships.

The NCAA was stripping athletes of outside aid/support while setting what they allowed internally at a calculated minimum.

So.. to keep it under 10000000000 words.. we agree?

[Krakan]

They aren't "professional teams", by definition.

Also, the pairing-together is entirely an American thing. It does not exist outside the USA. While there are university team sports, they're pretty much irrelevant to anyone not interested in the sport. I couldn't tell you the names of the teams at any of the schools I attended, let alone any players or coaches.

Makes sense in a way that doesn't make sense to me. If that makes sense.

I get why the schools want it. They make a killing but what benefit is there to the players. Call me prejudiced but I doubt many are all that interested in scholarships beyond the ability to play and be picked up.

[Themius]

They aren't "professional teams", by definition.

Also, the pairing-together is entirely an American thing. It does not exist outside the USA. While there are university team sports, they're pretty much irrelevant to anyone not interested in the sport. I couldn't tell you the names of the teams at any of the schools I attended, let alone any players or coaches.

This country has a knack of injecting capitalism where it can.

Junior and High School exploitation is next, better arguments to not pay them!

[PACOX]

So.. to keep it under 10000000000 words.. we agree?

More or less.

[Kellhound]

Quite a few 9-0 this term.

9-0 is typically the most common ruling.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

For sure 9-0 is the most common. A lot of really really stupid stuff makes it to the supreme court. Not saying this decision was one of those stupid things but man.. if you really read all the things they take in during a session you will find you get like 1 thing that makes sense to be there, 1 things that is iffy but acceptable, maybe 1 no brainers in what direction they were going to go but it has to be done for paperwork reasons (I think this decision was one of those) and then a ton of just whiny BS that they probably just zip over in 9-0 rush overs.

[draynay]

Yep, it is pretty bad when you see a lot of documentaries on places like ESPN where lots of college kids were sanctioned because they might have gotten a free meal from someone just because they were starving because they didn't have any money to eat.

For me it hit peak ridiculousness when Jameis Winston got caught "stealing" crab legs because it is far less trouble for him to "steal" them than for them to have been given to him for free.

[postman1782]

For me it hit peak ridiculousness when Jameis Winston got caught "stealing" crab legs because it is far less trouble for him to "steal" them than for them to have been given to him for free.

Yep, I have seen lots of schools and players have been sanctioned for it, making people lose championships, and trophies, or not being able to be in the post season or bowl games, it is just ridiculous.

[Low Hanging Fruit]

For me it hit peak ridiculousness when Jameis Winston got caught "stealing" crab legs because it is far less trouble for him to "steal" them than for them to have been given to him for free.

I went to college at a fairly small school that barely had a football program and those gents had an athletic coop that reminded me of one of those massive cafeteria chains like Furs in it and it was open like 16 hours a day. Regular students couldn't even go in. Starving wasn't thier problem. Jameis Winston went to Flordia State that's football budget was probably larger than my whole schools. So food, probably really decent or even good food, was availiable to him without a doubt. That dude got caught stealing because he was a stupid kid at the time. Not because he couldn't get a bite of food.

[tehdang]

9-0 is typically the most common ruling.

Not on issues with this import. Catholic adoption agencies refusing to adopt out to gay parents and punished by state got a 9-0 and NCAA amateur athletes. The uncontroversial issues more frequently revolve around unanimous decisions.

The 9-0 in favor of the Colorado baker, in past sessions, were much more rare in the big cases with surrounding controversy.

[Kellhound]

Not on issues with this import. Catholic adoption agencies refusing to adopt out to gay parents and punished by state got a 9-0 and NCAA amateur athletes. The uncontroversial issues more frequently revolve around unanimous decisions.

The 9-0 in favor of the Colorado baker, in past sessions, were much more rare in the big cases with surrounding controversy.

Yes and no. Only if the controversy exists in the laws.

[Egomaniac]

Makes sense in a way that doesn't make sense to me. If that makes sense.

I get why the schools want it. They make a killing but what benefit is there to the players. Call me prejudiced but I doubt many are all that interested in scholarships beyond the ability to play and be picked up.

You'd be surprised at how many student athletes use their sports scholarship to get an education they would otherwise never be able to get. Playing football and what not is great...but the majority of the players on college teams will never go any further and they know that. Apparently the odds of getting picked for the NFL are about 1 in 17....or just under 6%. So, facing that, it's a good idea to have at least a backup plan.

And for the ones with dreams of going pro...you pretty much need to be on a college team to have a chance at going to the big show.

[cuafpr]

probably going to see the powerhouse schools stay there even longer now. Those top-tier school will have the money to rain down on the best athletes while lower-tier schools fight for what's left... anyone good enough to get rich over the likenesses being used was likely on "paid" via a full ride already. Can't speak for all schools but mine and most that I know of their athletes got the best dorms, private dining at no costs, free tutoring, private computer labs/study areas etc... this was ruling was not needed imo and thus wrong. (also ignores the game they got which allowed them to get away with our sorts of shit)