Unlike Emmert, Baker appears to be open to the NCAA rolling over quickly on NIL and direct player compensation.

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Say what you will about Mark Emmert, he fought the massive changes to the NCAA for years and years to avoid NIL.

While NIL is just for the players, it's massively destructive to the game so fighting it in court, even with loss after loss, kept the NCAA from beginning to collapse.

Charlie Baker is a politician. As such, he likely has no spine for a fight. He's apparently negotiating a "back pay NIL" settlement for former players who had no chance for NIL earnings. I get it. It's a financial move for the NCAA.

BUT, Baker is also likely seeking a deal on the "schools providing direct compensation" cases which will destroy what's left of amateur status, most likely, and worse apparently let the courts start setting "free agency" and "salary cap" limits for college athletics.

NEVER put a politician in charge of anything. They are spineless.

Sources: NCAA in talks to settle NIL antitrust case

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.

www.espn.com

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Mark Emmert is the main reason for all of the craziness. He kept his head in the sand for years and years as everyone saw what was slowly headed towards college sports . This complete chaos could’ve been avoided w/ just a little forward thinking from Emmert .

 

[GAVol]

It’s unreal how willing people are for the rights of others to get trampled in the name of having something good to watch on TV.

Criticizing the guy that’s trying to survive the inevitable while praising the guy that drug out a fight over a business model that was rejected 9-0 by the Supreme Court is quite a show of mental gymnastics.

 

[Delmar]

Say what you will about Mark Emmert, he fought the massive changes to the NCAA for years and years to avoid NIL.

While NIL is just for the players, it's massively destructive to the game so fighting it in court, even with loss after loss, kept the NCAA from beginning to collapse.

Charlie Baker is a politician. As such, he likely has no spine for a fight. He's apparently negotiating a "back pay NIL" settlement for former players who had no chance for NIL earnings. I get it. It's a financial move for the NCAA.

BUT, Baker is also likely seeking a deal on the "schools providing direct compensation" cases which will destroy what's left of amateur status, most likely, and worse apparently let the courts start setting "free agency" and "salary cap" limits for college athletics.

NEVER put a politician in charge of anything. They are spineless.

Sources: NCAA in talks to settle NIL antitrust case

The leaders of college sports are involved in "deep discussions" to reach a legal settlement that would likely lay out the framework for sharing revenue with athletes in a future NCAA business model, sources told ESPN.

www.espn.com

He should have been more forward thinking. What Emmert did was like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Made no difference to the inevitable end result.

 

[Delmar]

It’s unreal how willing people are for the rights of others to get trampled in the name of having something good to watch on TV.

Criticizing the guy that’s trying to survive the inevitable while praising the guy that drug out a fight over a business model that was rejected 9-0 by the Supreme Court is quite a show of mental gymnastics.

Agreed. Baker is just trying to choke down the sandwich he’s been handed.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

Agreed. Baker is just trying to choke down the sandwich he’s been handed.

After that bull$hit he tried to pull a few months ago I really don’t have any sympathy for the guy.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Agreed. Baker is just trying to choke down the sandwich he’s been handed.

What Emmert did was delay NIL as long as possible. Had he negotiated an "NIL fund" like Baker is doing, he'd have invited the courts to declare "if you're paying them to play, they're employees of the school."

This is exactly what Baker is inviting the courts to do and what he suggested previously with the "special division" idea for some schools to compensate players.

Yes, it's inevitable, but the only workable strategy to maintain amateur status as long as possible was to MAKE the courts force it, like they did with NIL, and appeal it to the Supreme Court. Baker is caving and negotiating amateur status away rather than delaying via the court system.

He's just throwing up the white flag and surrendering by offering to pay players directly from a school fund. Smaller schools who lose money on athletics will have no way to do this, so the financially successful schools compensating athletes will have a league and other colleges...... won't be able to afford sports.

Do you expect the courts to make a list of which school should pay and which school shouldn't? Doubtful. Baker is selling the majority of schools out to maintain the business of a few.

 

[LouderVol]

What Emmert did was delay NIL as long as possible. Had he negotiated an "NIL fund" like Baker is doing, he'd have invited the courts to declare "if you're paying them to play, they're employees of the school."

This is exactly what Baker is inviting the courts to do and what he suggested previously with the "special division" idea for some schools to compensate players.

Yes, it's inevitable, but the only workable strategy to maintain amateur status as long as possible was to MAKE the courts force it, like they did with NIL, and appeal it to the Supreme Court. Baker is caving and negotiating amateur status away rather than delaying via the court system.

He's just throwing up the white flag and surrendering by offering to pay players directly from a school fund. Smaller schools who lose money on athletics will have no way to do this, so the financially successful schools compensating athletes will have a league and other colleges...... won't be able to afford sports.

Do you expect the courts to make a list of which school should pay and which school shouldn't? Doubtful. Baker is selling the majority of schools out to maintain the business of a few.

Why does amateur status matter?

I cheer for the Vols because they represent the university I went to. Not because they were unpaid. It's not like even most students had anything in common with the athletes.

Different majors, different classes, different standards, no tutoring, different living arrangements, different meal plans, different transportation.

They might have been enrolled in the same university but there was nothing linking the athletes to most of the university beside the branding. That branding isnt going away. The sport will be fine once its allowed to settle

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Why does amateur status matter?

I cheer for the Vols because they represent the university I went to. Not because they were unpaid. It's not like even most students had anything in common with the athletes.

Different majors, different classes, different standards, no tutoring, different living arrangements, different meal plans, different transportation.

They might have been enrolled in the same university but there was nothing linking the athletes to most of the university beside the branding. That branding isnt going away. The sport will be fine once its allowed to settle

Exactly how is Tennessee Tech or ETSU or UTC supposed to survive with no money to compensate athletes? They can't, but what is the difference between UT and ETSU? So why should one school pay athletes and another not? That's the next lawsuit Baker is inviting. That's likely why Dilfer suggested UAB athletes organize, so Tuscaloosa can't just leave them hanging with zero compensation while the elephant gets all the money.

Of course, the TN brand, power T, etc will always have support but the losers are athletes at smaller schools who don't have, as the original article suggested aTm is planning, 15-30 million in "new expenses" to add to the budget.

The money schools need to form a pro league or they'll destroy college athletics for most college athletes.

 

[volfanbill]

Exactly how is Tennessee Tech or ETSU or UTC supposed to survive with no money to compensate athletes? They can't, but what is the difference between UT and ETSU? So why should one school pay athletes and another not? That's the next lawsuit Baker is inviting. That's likely why Dilfer suggested UAB athletes organize, so Tuscaloosa can't just leave them hanging with zero compensation while the elephant gets all the money.

Of course, the TN brand, power T, etc will always have support but the losers are athletes at smaller schools who don't have, as the original article suggested aTm is planning, 15-30 million in "new expenses" to add to the budget.

The money schools need to form a pro league or they'll destroy college athletics for most college athletes.

They weren’t competing to begin with? Money over the table doesn’t change that

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

They weren’t competing to begin with? Money over the table doesn’t change that

The difference is when the court declares players ARE employees at UT. How can you argue a player at another state school ISN'T an employee?

The problem is the association of UT to the UT system and the state. Why is a UT football or basketball player paid by the state but a UTC player not paid by the state?

 

[volfanbill]

The difference is when the court declares players ARE employees at UT. How can you argue a player at another state school ISN'T an employee?

The problem is the association of UT to the UT system and the state. Why is a UT football or basketball player paid by the state but a UTC player not paid by the state?

All schools are allowed to pay. Where are you seeing otherwise? ETSU just laid out their plans, needs, and expectations like a month ago on how they can make it work

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

All schools are allowed to pay. Where are you seeing otherwise? ETSU just laid out their plans, needs, and expectations like a month ago on how they can make it work

That's the issue. Schools like ETSU and UTC don't make money from athletics. They may do it for awhile but money is never easy to maintain at an academic institution.

Negotiating pro athlete salaries might be easy at UT with $50M in media a year but it'll quickly drive schools like ETSU and UTC to consider what the mission of a university is when it comes to owning a pro sports organization and whether athletics is the best use of donor resources.

 

[volfanbill]

That's the issue. Schools like ETSU and UTC don't make money from athletics. They may do it for awhile but money is never easy to maintain at an academic institution.

Negotiating pro athlete salaries might be easy at UT with $50M in media a year but it'll quickly drive schools like ETSU and UTC to consider what the mission of a university is when it comes to owning a pro sports organization and whether athletics is the best use of donor resources.

So again, things will continue to be just as they are now in that aspect…

And donors decide where their resources go, not the schools. Whether that’s at TENNESSEE, Texas, Ohio State, Old Dominion, ETSU, or Milligan College.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

So again, things will continue to be just as they are now in that aspect…

And donors decide where their resources go, not the schools. Whether that’s at TENNESSEE, Texas, Ohio State, Old Dominion, ETSU, or Milligan College.

I suspect UAB's Dilfer basically suggesting to his players that they organize is the beginning of smaller state schools banding together to sue for a piece of the flagship school's big media pie.

That's part of where this gets messy.

The other part is the added expense to smaller schools will cut into the academic giving and the admins, with pressure from the academics, are going to have to decide whether to go after that donor for school resources or athletic salary resources.

What do you think the mission of a college is..... academics or athletics, when the nickels get tight?

 

[volfanbill]

I suspect UAB's Dilfer basically suggesting to his players that they organize is the beginning of smaller state schools banding together to sue for a piece of the flagship school's big media pie.

That's part of where this gets messy.

The other part is the added expense to smaller schools will cut into the academic giving and the admins, with pressure from the academics, are going to have to decide whether to go after that donor for school resources or athletic salary resources.

What do you think the mission of a college is..... academics or athletics, when the nickels get tight?

How many times are you going to move goal posts? Small schools will have small nil collectives, medium schools will have medium collectives, large schools will have large collectives.

And again, donors dictate where their money goes, not the other way around. Just like always, when money gets tight, schools will pony up to the donors. Whether it’s for a new science building or a new basketball practice facility.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

How many times are you going to move goal posts? Small schools will have small nil collectives, medium schools will have medium collectives, large schools will have large collectives.

And again, donors dictate where their money goes, not the other way around. Just like always, when money gets tight, schools will pony up to the donors. Whether it’s for a new science building or a new basketball practice facility.

The issue is the same but the money is obviously increasing. When you see schools like UAB suggesting their players organize, it's obvious the compensation is going to increase, not decrease.

There's finite money. I believe DeerPark, who is an attorney and deals with donors, suggested that NIL giving is already concerning admins because they're seeing a drop in academic donations.

It's a matter of negotiated salaries that will drive athletics costs up and whether you're pro union or anti union, organized labor negotiations tend to create higher wages and benefits.

So yeah, you can approach donors for a building but that only occurs every few years. Salaries are not "one off" expenses to hit a donor with but a yearly, increasing expense.

At some point, there's a diminishing return and even ETSU won't be able to justify athletics if they're playing AA High School level ball because they can't afford to pay better.

 

[Delmar]

What Emmert did was delay NIL as long as possible. Had he negotiated an "NIL fund" like Baker is doing, he'd have invited the courts to declare "if you're paying them to play, they're employees of the school."

This is exactly what Baker is inviting the courts to do and what he suggested previously with the "special division" idea for some schools to compensate players.

Yes, it's inevitable, but the only workable strategy to maintain amateur status as long as possible was to MAKE the courts force it, like they did with NIL, and appeal it to the Supreme Court. Baker is caving and negotiating amateur status away rather than delaying via the court system.

He's just throwing up the white flag and surrendering by offering to pay players directly from a school fund. Smaller schools who lose money on athletics will have no way to do this, so the financially successful schools compensating athletes will have a league and other colleges...... won't be able to afford sports.

Do you expect the courts to make a list of which school should pay and which school shouldn't? Doubtful. Baker is selling the majority of schools out to maintain the business of a few.

I think amateurism going away was inevitable with the courts ruling the way they rule. No need to delay it. Might as well get on with whatever the system is going to be. Doesn’t make it any more palatable to most folks but it is what it is. I know I won’t be as invested as I was when I was younger.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I think amateurism going away was inevitable with the courts ruling the way they rule. No need to delay it. Might as well get on with whatever the system is going to be. Doesn’t make it any more palatable to most folks but it is what it is. I know I won’t be as invested as I was when I was younger.

I agree. My prediction is: some schools are going to look at the cost of employing athletes and decide the upside to the college community isn't with the expense.

That's the bad part of this. If it can somehow be arranged that "Yes, Carson-Newman is a college. Yes, they have athletes and teams. No, those teams aren't pro teams and shouldn't be paid." I just think it's very difficult legally to submit that one college athlete is an employee and another college athlete isn't.

By quickening the pace of these changes, Baker is just tossing small schools to the wind. Will they be lumped as employers of their athletes? Where's the cutoff line? Who is drawing that line?

Schools that are pinched financially anyway can't afford to start paying athletes then get sued by previous athletes because they didn't pay them.

It's going to get ugly.

 

[WillisWG]

Barter exchange to straight capitalism. The value of a college degree for S-A has forever been harmed.

There will be far more losers than winners if we end up paying players.

 

[volfanbill]

I agree. My prediction is: some schools are going to look at the cost of employing athletes and decide the upside to the college community isn't with the expense.

That's the bad part of this. If it can somehow be arranged that "Yes, Carson-Newman is a college. Yes, they have athletes and teams. No, those teams aren't pro teams and shouldn't be paid." I just think it's very difficult legally to submit that one college athlete is an employee and another college athlete isn't.

By quickening the pace of these changes, Baker is just tossing small schools to the wind. Will they be lumped as employers of their athletes? Where's the cutoff line? Who is drawing that line?

Schools that are pinched financially anyway can't afford to start paying athletes then get sued by previous athletes because they didn't pay them.

It's going to get ugly.

lol so now you’re all the way down the ladder to D2 schools. lol.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

lol so now you’re all the way down the ladder to D2 schools. lol.

I know. It's ridiculous. People said NIL wouldn't be a big issue and it's in high schools now, if not middle school.

Just wait. Schools cannot afford to pay players. If players are declared employees by the courts, schools cannot just decide "we're not going to pay them." Just wait.

 

[volfanbill]

I know. It's ridiculous. People said NIL wouldn't be a big issue and it's in high schools now, if not middle school.

Just wait. Schools cannot afford to pay players. If players are declared employees by the courts, schools cannot just decide "we're not going to pay them." Just wait.

Can’t back anything up, so you just keep repeating yourself. Brilliant

 

[volfanbill]

Just wait!

 

[volfanbill]

Pelissippi State won’t be able to survive this!