NCAA and the antitrust lawsuits

[Anonymous]

Thoughts on the ongoing NCAA antitrust lawsuits and its effect on the NCAA?

This is a local based soccer forum sure, but sooooo many here favor this league vs that league, usually always using college commitments or exposure as a metric of success. The lawsuit is primarily aimed at collegiate football programs but to me this will have a trickle down effect to all collegiate sports. Just reading a few of the articles, I really feel like NCAA is on the losing end here.

[Anonymous]

If this is the first step to dissolve the NCAA, I'm all for it. Billion dollar company for what?

[Anonymous]

I think the whole college scholarship scam should be burned to the ground and colleges should pay players to advertise for their institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the whole college scholarship scam should be burned to the ground and colleges should pay players to advertise for their institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the whole college scholarship scam should be burned to the ground and colleges should pay players to advertise for their institutions.

Or just end the whole athletic scholarship thing all together and let the organizations for pro sports figure out their pipeline rather than mix education and athletics.

They can still keep academic scholarships, which are more plentiful than athletic ones anyways.

[Anonymous]

The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Did not even know about that story. This thing is growing but nobody seems to think of it as an issue that could affect youth sports even.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

I think there's still value for colleges to have teams and play sports.

The problem is that the value of what college can provide and what players represent is out of wack. The one thing you can never get back is time. Young players value is very high at 18 and diminishes as they get older. A degree from a college has a set value that doesn't change. If colleges paid players 100k a year and if they players hard to use that money to pay for school it would all work out. But colleges don't want to do this because this gives players all kinds of other benefits because they're now employees not students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

At that point why not just privatize the entire thing and let the pro organizations deal with it.

I think there's still value for colleges to have teams and play sports.

The problem is that the value of what college can provide and what players represent is out of wack. The one thing you can never get back is time. Young players value is very high at 18 and diminishes as they get older. A degree from a college has a set value that doesn't change. If colleges paid players 100k a year and if they players hard to use that money to pay for school it would all work out. But colleges don't want to do this because this gives players all kinds of other benefits because they're now employees not students.

That could also fix the transfer portal show though. If they're contracted employees, they can't just hit the market.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger case is the Dartmouth basketball case before the NLRB. If the players win, all mens non-revenue sports (including soccer are gone). Women's sports will exist to the extent needed for title IX compliance

Or colleges pay players to play a game and represent/advertise their intuition on television.

There is a loophole. But colleges don't want to do this.

If they go down that road, being competitive in football is going to soak up too much of the athletics budget to justify soccer or tennis. Most schools are going to choose paying a pass rusher over fielding a squash team.

[Anonymous]

Student athletes need a players union

[Anonymous]

https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2023/10/31/the-ncaa-antitrust-and-the-future-of-college-sports

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Student athletes need a players union

A union would be the worst thing for them. Anti trust is removing just about every impediment to athletes getting paid as much as the can and having the freedom to move as often as they want. The second a CBA is in place, that freedom vanishes