House Settlement

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I hope the players are stupid enough to do that. And I hope the universities respond by cutting ties with the sports programs and telling the players to find another place to play.

As a graduate of UT, I love the atmosphere of the games - but I despise the greed and non-gratitude of what all is given to these athletes. It is why I now only donate the bare minimum necessary to obtain tickets. That money could be better spent donating to students that want to help with research and work that matters.

I've suggested the schools have ZERO business being in the pro sports business. They are academic organizations, NOT multi million dollar sports organizations but here we are. The schools built this huge business out of what SHOULD be the Power T and tradition but IS a huge revenue stream. The highest paid state employee is........ a coach at the college.

 

[Woodlawn VOL]

Is class attendance mandatory? If so, I guess they need to revoke my bachelor's degree because I missed a ton of classes. You will still have universities that will have lower academic standards for athletes, but they will still have standards. No way will the majority of university presidents go along with athletes not being academically eligible students.

What most on here get so wrong is the vast majority of student athletes WANT the education. There will always be a degree of grade compliance as it should be. Regardless of getting paid which I don’t have a problem with, the universities are on solid ground holding players to a minimum grade requirement. With first rate tutoring available it is inexcusable for a player to not be able to meet the minimum requirements. We see grades going up among athletes at most major institutions. Folks that keep coming on here broad brushing the notion that athletes don’t go or care about the education are by and large just flat out lying or real ignorant on the situation. Of course there are always small percentage that don’t care but that number is small in contrast to the number that actually take their education seriously. GBO

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

They would then be paid by what each University could afford. I dare say the number of schools that can even afford 22M and maintain the level of sports programs they have is minimal.

Let's just go ahead and crown OSU as the champion for every sport for the rest of time. Let's just go ahead and tell a lot of future players that they no longer have access to education post high school because most schools cannot afford to pay for the scholarships and pay them to participate in sports.

Let's just go ahead and create football minor leagues across the country where players will get paid based on how successful those leagues will be - trust me they won't be as successful as the colleges and the "market" value that you seem to be concerned with will be nowhere near the 22 M per team.

The NIL value of TN football, what we paid, was estimated to be close to $20M like Ohio State. That IS the market value UT felt they needed to compete at the elite level. The players didn't FORCE UT to pay that much, UT CHOSE to pay that much.

UT CHOSE have the state fight the NCAA attempts to restrict NIL in various lawsuits. UT CHOSE to have the state fight the NCAA for multiple transfers without penalty.

But sure...... it's the fault of the players.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

What most on here get so wrong is the vast majority of student athletes WANT the education. There will always be a degree of grade compliance as it should be. Regardless of getting paid which I don’t have a problem with, the universities are on solid ground holding players to a minimum grade requirement. With first rate tutoring available it is inexcusable for a player to not be able to meet the minimum requirements. We see grades going up among athletes at most major institutions. Folks that keep coming on here broad brushing the notion that athletes don’t go or care about the education are by and large just flat out lying or real ignorant on the situation. Of course there are always small percentage that don’t care but that number is small in contrast to the number that actually take their education seriously. GBO

Much like people said, "I liked it when players were loyal and didn't transfer" and "I liked it when players didn't expect money" was because THEY HAD NO CHOICES.

Currently players have no choice but to go to school if they want to play. And it's not easy given the demands of playing SEC sports. There is a lot of academic support for athletes and online classes make it easier to manage also, but the bottom line, like it was with players not transferring and not getting paid openly........ they don't have a choice but to do it.

Saying they WANTED to be at UT and not transfer might or might not have been true but what was the option?

Saying they were fine getting paid under the table and not openly and much less might or might not have been true but what was the option?

Saying they want to attend classes now is easy but what is the option?

 

[The Original Fade]

What most on here get so wrong is the vast majority of student athletes WANT the education. There will always be a degree of grade compliance as it should be. Regardless of getting paid which I don’t have a problem with, the universities are on solid ground holding players to a minimum grade requirement. With first rate tutoring available it is inexcusable for a player to not be able to meet the minimum requirements. We see grades going up among athletes at most major institutions. Folks that keep coming on here broad brushing the notion that athletes don’t go or care about the education are by and large just flat out lying or real ignorant on the situation. Of course there are always small percentage that don’t care but that number is small in contrast to the number that actually take their education seriously. GBO

you think a 18 year old making 5 mil a year to play at UT or another power 5 school will feel the need to take 15 hours a semester to get their degree? I think that’s naive

 

[volfan102455]

The NIL value of TN football, what we paid, was estimated to be close to $20M like Ohio State. That IS the market value UT felt they needed to compete at the elite level. The players didn't FORCE UT to pay that much, UT CHOSE to pay that much.

UT CHOSE have the state fight the NCAA attempts to restrict NIL in various lawsuits. UT CHOSE to have the state fight the NCAA for multiple transfers without penalty.

But sure...... it's the fault of the players.

That is NIL and NIL is still available. The original $22M you referenced, if I understand what I am reading is from the revenue sharing aspect of this, which would come directly from the University out of any profits they make (many schools make 0 profit). NIL does not come directly from the current revenue stream from the University. So, UT did not choose to pay that much - the collectives did.

Players will still be allowed to participate in NIL for additional dollars.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

That is NIL and NIL is still available. The original $22M you referenced, if I understand what I am reading is from the revenue sharing aspect of this, which would come directly from the University out of any profits they make (many schools make 0 profit). NIL does not come directly from the current revenue stream from the University. So, UT did not choose to pay that much - the collectives did.

Players will still be allowed to participate in NIL for additional dollars.

I believe schools can pay up to $22M whether they make money or not, though fans might not respond as well to a "talent tax" if there's little success.

What the NCAA is clearly trying to do is limit the amount of money schools spend on players via trying to establish a base and limit outside NIL as much as they can.

It's obvious they want to cut down the money AND control how much teams spend. That's anticompetitive, of course, as competition for talent drives up the price paid for talent. You know, the American Way of economics.

Any attempt to control the market will be quickly shot down because anticompetitive behavior with NIL has been repeatedly struck down by the courts.

It's amazing to me that Volnation tends toward conservative, tends toward businesses not being restrained, basically tends toward free market capitalism....... until we get to NIL, then suddenly everyone turns into a leftist who wants wage controls.

 

[volfan102455]

you think a 18 year old making 5 mil a year to play at UT or another power 5 school will feel the need to take 15 hours a semester to get their degree? I think that’s naive

You think UT can pay a larger number of players 5M each? Based on my quick google search there are approximately 700 student athletes at UT. If they paid then each of them 100K, that is 70M per year. The total revenue for the AD, before expenses, at UTK last year was just 234M. That is before coaching staff salaries, event staff, facilities upkeep, travel and training expenses, gear, uniforms, etc.

While yes there is a lot of money generated from the TV deals, companies like ESPN, the SEC network, ABC etc. also have expenses to pay - that money disappears quickly just on expenses needed to bring those events to the public. And then you have the dollars promised to the schools being divided by 16.

The majority of these students will not get rich on what the school can afford to give them under the revenue sharing portion of this and still be able to support the program that generates the revenue. NIL will still be their avenue to generate money. And that part will continue to be dictated by the "market value" of the individual player. And that market value will be determined by the $$'s said player can generate for those companies that support NIL.

Most of these players will NOT get rich. Most of these players will NOT play at the professional level. If they are being advised correctly, they will know the importance of taking advantage of the educational opportunities.

I believe that some focus only on the exception ... the Nico if you will ... and forget that only a few will reach the status to command 5M a year.

 

[volfan102455]

I believe schools can pay up to $22M whether they make money or not, though fans might not respond as well to a "talent tax" if there's little success.

There will be a price point where ticket sales will decline. Some may roll the dice on a great season and a chance to make the dollars back by selling the tickets to the big games (which is already happening).

As for paying whether you have it or not - you are proposing that the schools go in debt - where is that money coming from? For a state supported school like UT, it would have to come from the state via increased taxes.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

There will be a price point where ticket sales will decline. Some may roll the dice on a great season and a chance to make the dollars back by selling the tickets to the big games (which is already happening).

As for paying whether you have it or not - you are proposing that the schools go in debt - where is that money coming from? For a state supported school like UT, it would have to come from the state via increased taxes.

Schools, over the years, have raised money to expand stadiums, etc and revamp locker rooms and build training facilities to attract talent.

Suddenly when they're raising money to directly pay that talent people start looking at how much all this costs. People say we should just stop paying them and put the money toward research and such as though we've not raised millions and millions over the years to create an experience to attract recruits.

It's crazy to me that all of a sudden the money is an issue when how much have we spent on Anderson or Neyland or the locker rooms over the years? Now it's an issue?

 

[volfan102455]

Currently players have no choice but to go to school if they want to play. And it's not easy given the demands of playing SEC sports. There is a lot of academic support for athletes and online classes make it easier to manage also, but the bottom line, like it was with players not transferring and not getting paid openly........ they don't have a choice but to do it.

I laugh at this because it is not easy for any student to meet the demands of school and be able to participate in any other activity. And there is a larger portion than you probably think of non-athletes who have to work while in college to make ends meet - it is either that or incur a large amount of student debt. Even then what you can borrow is just enough to cover expenses - not enough for other activities.

I will say one of the things that a student learns if they have to balance work and school is how to prioritize and manage their time - a skill that will help them later in life no what matter what path they take.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

Schools, over the years, have raised money to expand stadiums, etc and revamp locker rooms and build training facilities to attract talent.

Suddenly when they're raising money to directly pay that talent people start looking at how much all this costs. People say we should just stop paying them and put the money toward research and such as though we've not raised millions and millions over the years to create an experience to attract recruits.

It's crazy to me that all of a sudden the money is an issue when how much have we spent on Anderson or Neyland or the locker rooms over the years? Now it's an issue?

It is an issue now that we have to spend over and above the old way and STILL have to cover ALL the costs for ALL the non revenue sports.

Not going to lose too much sleep till after the next 50 lawsuits are settled.

 

[UT97Vol]

Interesting concept - I don't get to agree with what my employer pays me. I can take it or leave it though. Why would the same not be true in this situation? Players can take it or go play somewhere else - which could lead to them not being able to play anywhere.

I really don't get the idea that players should dictate what they can paid. How much someone gets paid is generally decided by how much the employer is willing and can pay that person along with the going rates in the market.

Once again some of you act like there is an endless supply of $$'s to be given to these players. There isn't.

What SayU said. He nailed it.

 

[volfan102455]

Schools, over the years, have raised money to expand stadiums, etc and revamp locker rooms and build training facilities to attract talent.

Suddenly when they're raising money to directly pay that talent people start looking at how much all this costs. People say we should just stop paying them and put the money toward research and such as though we've not raised millions and millions over the years to create an experience to attract recruits.

It's crazy to me that all of a sudden the money is an issue when how much have we spent on Anderson or Neyland or the locker rooms over the years? Now it's an issue?

You would be asking those same folks that donate to upgrading the facilities to donate even more. You believe that an endless supply of money is available. You believe that once you get past those folks (... many are probably the blue hairs that folks on here don't like ...) who can give large donations, that enough folks who don't have a lot of money will pony up more.

You also believe that putting burden on the state to raise taxes that impact everyone in the state would go over well. And does all that money get diverted to Knoxville, away from the state universities in Chattanooga, Nashville, Memphis, Murfreesboro, Johnson City, etc.?

Like I have stated way too many times - there seems to be the thought that there is an endless supply of money when there isn't. Some sports programs will disappear - chances are only football and men's basketball survive. I also think that women's basketball survives - to prevent the lawsuits. Other sports are probably history.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

You would be asking those same folks that donate to upgrading the facilities to donate even more. You believe that an endless supply of money is available. You believe that once you get past those folks (... many are probably the blue hairs that folks on here don't like ...) who can give large donations, that enough folks who don't have a lot of money will pony up more.

You also believe that putting burden on the state to raise taxes that impact everyone in the state would go over well. And does all that money get diverted to Knoxville, away from the state universities in Chattanooga, Nashville, Memphis, Murfreesboro, Johnson City, etc.?

Like I have stated way too many times - there seems to be the thought that there is an endless supply of money when there isn't. Some sports programs will disappear - chances are only football and men's basketball survive. I also think that women's basketball survives - to prevent the lawsuits. Other sports are probably history.

Money is always finite and like everyone the schools will have to decide if non-revenue sports deserve the support. If we are going to be a pro sports organization, some sports will fold as many do when they can't produce revenue.

That is not how college athletics should be but it's obviously the path UT has chosen.

If you're choosing, as UT is, to have an elite stadium, elite training facility, elite locker rooms, etc THEN they choose not to pay for elite talent I'll insist the cart is before the horse. Get the talent at all costs or the facilities are wasted.

Recruiting has changed. All the beautiful lockers and state of the art training rooms won't matter if Oregon is doubling your NIL offer to a player. Pro sports runs on money, lots of money.

Again, UT shouldn't be in the pro sports business but we obviously are having one of the largest stadiums in America, state of the art training and rehab facilities, pro level locker rooms, recruiting routinely via private jet trips, and on and on.

But yes, goodness yes, the money the athletes get is the big problem.

 

[The Original Fade]

You think UT can pay a larger number of players 5M each? Based on my quick google search there are approximately 700 student athletes at UT. If they paid then each of them 100K, that is 70M per year. The total revenue for the AD, before expenses, at UTK last year was just 234M. That is before coaching staff salaries, event staff, facilities upkeep, travel and training expenses, gear, uniforms, etc.

While yes there is a lot of money generated from the TV deals, companies like ESPN, the SEC network, ABC etc. also have expenses to pay - that money disappears quickly just on expenses needed to bring those events to the public. And then you have the dollars promised to the schools being divided by 16.

The majority of these students will not get rich on what the school can afford to give them under the revenue sharing portion of this and still be able to support the program that generates the revenue. NIL will still be their avenue to generate money. And that part will continue to be dictated by the "market value" of the individual player. And that market value will be determined by the $$'s said player can generate for those companies that support NIL.

Most of these players will NOT get rich. Most of these players will NOT play at the professional level. If they are being advised correctly, they will know the importance of taking advantage of the educational opportunities.

I believe that some focus only on the exception ... the Nico if you will ... and forget that only a few will reach the status to command 5M a year.

A - you’re assuming every student athlete will be paid the same
B - even while getting paid directly from the school they can still be paid through collectives and other NIL opportunities. Like the NFL, many will have their salary from UT and then endorsements on top of that

 

[LAVol1]

Schools are now going to compensate players for playing athletics. They look a lot like employees at that point.

Once they are legally athlete employees, they'll sue to have the student portion removed because WHY should an employee who is hired as an athlete be forced to go to school? Because it will be a condition of employment! Don't understand why you can't understand that an employer can set the terms of employment.

If they WANT to go to school, that's like anyone else, fine, but don't let it get in the way of your employment.

We see on VN all the time now "they're getting paid so there are expectations that they'll need to meet." Exactly. Those expectations are to be athletes so WHY should school be mandatory?

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

@LAVol1
Re: condition of employment.

Of course I realize schools could set lots of conditions for employment BUT there's a competition for talent.

Schools which drop or make optional school attendance for their athlete employees would have a leg up on those making it mandatory.

Granted, if a kid WANTS to go to school, it's not an issue, but with a lot of "one and done" or "two and done" athletes with next level talent, making it optional is just one less hassle for them on the way to the league.

 

[Firebirdparts]

Well, I haven't found the full text, just the summaries passed around by everybody saying third party NIL deals will be reviewed by the commission. Also, the conferences and commission and NCAA are asking Congress to pass a law giving them an anti-trust exemption. So that is consistent, I think, with the situation they're in.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

Well, I haven't found the full text, just the summaries passed around by everybody saying third party NIL deals will be reviewed by the commission. Also, the conferences and commission and NCAA are asking Congress to pass a law giving them an anti-trust exemption. So that is consistent, I think, with the situation they're in.

This ESPN article has a link to the 76 page ruling.

Judge signs settlement; colleges to pay athletes

Schools are now free to begin paying their athletes directly, marking the dawn of a new era in college sports brought about by a multibillion-dollar legal settlement that was formally approved Friday.

www.espn.com

 

[volfan102455]

@LAVol1
Re: condition of employment.

Of course I realize schools could set lots of conditions for employment BUT there's a competition for talent.

Schools which drop or make optional school attendance for their athlete employees would have a leg up on those making it mandatory.

Granted, if a kid WANTS to go to school, it's not an issue, but with a lot of "one and done" or "two and done" athletes with next level talent, making it optional is just one less hassle for them on the way to the league.

You are expecting a school to go rouge to obtain the better players. I seriously doubt any schools that matter will make attendance optional.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

You are expecting a school to go rouge to obtain the better players. I seriously doubt any schools that matter will make attendance optional.

I'm expecting the players to be declared employees by the court then to unionize and have school attendance negotiated as optional in the collective bargaining agreement.

 

[volfan102455]

I'm expecting the players to be declared employees by the court then to unionize and have school attendance negotiated as optional in the collective bargaining agreement.

I'm not expecting that to happen. But to play along - they do that - then the university has no responsibility to offer them anything to assist with training unrelated to the sport. For that 90 percent plus that are playing to get assistance for their education - they now have to pay EVERYTHING but what most get paid will not come close to supporting what they get through the scholarship. So the few get to dictate something that most don't want?

A union typically speaks for everyone involved and I dare say only the "few" that are so sure they are going make it at the pro level will want to remove the educational free ride. For most that will take away an opportunity they have today.

You are of the opinion that most players have a problem with attending classes and receiving an education - I think most are there and participate as a way to pay for said education and understand they are as the commercial says .... going PRO in something else.

 

[volfan102455]

To add also if they become employees - then it opens up all other rules - if I was an athlete, I would not want to be classified as an employee. They have it better as not being an employee.

 

[SayUWantAreVOLution]

I'm not expecting that to happen. But to play along - they do that - then the university has no responsibility to offer them anything to assist with training unrelated to the sport. For that 90 percent plus that are playing to get assistance for their education - they now have to pay EVERYTHING but what most get paid will not come close to supporting what they get through the scholarship. So the few get to dictate something that most don't want?

A union typically speaks for everyone involved and I dare say only the "few" that are so sure they are going make it at the pro level will want to remove the educational free ride. For most that will take away an opportunity they have today.

You are of the opinion that most players have a problem with attending classes and receiving an education - I think most are there and participate as a way to pay for said education and understand they are as the commercial says .... going PRO in something else.

Optional is the likely key word. Elsewhere you suggest that states make rules "because they have expectations beyond just fielding a team" which I assume means win.

In that, for decades players were paid under the table in the interest of the school's team having more talent.

Making school attendance optional allows it both ways. Those who want the education can get it and play. Those who don't can just play. Offering options is, like offering money to play, something teams historically use to attract better players.