menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: The Oregonian investigative report on how shoe companies get money to players' families
Page: 1 of 2
mail
person
doubledribble
3/29/2018 7:15 AM
Ted, this is probably the best summary I have seen of the swamp that the NCAA and college basketball is trying to decide how to navigate.

D.D.
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 8:23 AM
I think this will always go on. If the NBA were to again allow HS players to come straight to the league it would at least remove college basketball coaches as middle men.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 9:17 AM
Why not just let players make endorsement money? If Nike thinks it can make money by paying Bagley to wear Nike's, what's the harm in letting Bagley have that money?
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 9:42 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Why not just let players make endorsement money? If Nike thinks it can make money by paying Bagley to wear Nike's, what's the harm in letting Bagley have that money?
He should be able to. But the NCAA rules don't allow it. So he should be able to go straight to the NBA. Bagley could get full value of the endorsement without it having to funnel through an AAU organization.
mail
bornacatfan
3/29/2018 9:48 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Why not just let players make endorsement money? If Nike thinks it can make money by paying Bagley to wear Nike's, what's the harm in letting Bagley have that money?
HOw low do you go? High school? 6th graders with potential being paid to wear Nikes? "my baby gon to be the nexxx LayBron" is heard in gyms everywhere already...

Can't imagine how many parents will be pimpin out their kids if that goes through. Kind of a never ending rabbit hole once you go down it. Preserving amatuerism i s the key line in there. How does that affect college sports once you take that away? Have you ever followed Bagley's parents social media? What is in that article just scratches the surface and like Bagley's parents responses...much of what goes on will never see the light of day.
mail
person
rpbobcat
3/29/2018 10:23 AM
When I read the article,I kept thinking of Nick Nolte in Blue Chips.
mail
OhioCatFan
3/29/2018 10:40 AM
borna is completely right here. This is a rabbit hole with lots of unintended consequences. One is the loss of non-profit status for the entire institution. I know that there are ways around this like spinning off a separate for-profit corporation to run the sports affiliated with the university, but that's real messy itself. Let's preserve amateurism and playing for the love of the game and end the one-and-done phenomenon. Let these guys go directly to the NBA without stopping at Go. It's been done in baseball forever. The NBA needs to forced to develop a minor league system. Colleges should not be the minor league system for the NBA.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 1:02 PM
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Why not just let players make endorsement money? If Nike thinks it can make money by paying Bagley to wear Nike's, what's the harm in letting Bagley have that money?
HOw low do you go? High school? 6th graders with potential being paid to wear Nikes? "my baby gon to be the nexxx LayBron" is heard in gyms everywhere already...

Can't imagine how many parents will be pimpin out their kids if that goes through. Kind of a never ending rabbit hole once you go down it. Preserving amatuerism i s the key line in there. How does that affect college sports once you take that away? Have you ever followed Bagley's parents social media? What is in that article just scratches the surface and like Bagley's parents responses...much of what goes on will never see the light of day.
Why not let the free market determine "how low" you go? Nike's not going to pay any old 6th grader to wear Nikes because it doesn't make financial sense to do so. But in the instance that an individual has the ability to make money through endorsements, I just have a really hard time seeing how it somehow sullies the NCAA/Amateurism to let them do so.

People with poor grammar can think think their children are the next LeBron all they want. It doesn't matter unless Nike thinks so, too.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 1:18 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
The NBA needs to forced to develop a minor league system. Colleges should not be the minor league system for the NBA.
I agree completely that the NBA should be responsible for developing their own players, but the NCAA is complicit in this. To force the NBA, you also have to convince the NCAA to pass on the revenue generated by guys who will inevitable end up in the NBA.

And that revenue isn't just the uptick in ticket sales or TV deals. It's also in the amount of money donated to programs by NBA alumni.
mail
person
Ohio69
3/29/2018 1:19 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Why not let the free market determine "how low" you go?
Free market?

Here's what I'll do when I win the $502 million lottery Friday night. I'll buy one rental house in Athens, and then make it known that I am seeking endorsement deals with Ohio basketball players. I figure I should dole out money based on their recruiting ranking, which I figure is tied to their marketability for my rental company. $25,000 per year for 2 stars. $50,000 per year for three stars. $75,000 per year for four star recruits. $100,000 per year for 5 star recruits. I'll add bonuses if they increase their marketability by, say, winning any individual MAC award or MAC titles. They just need to put on my rental company tee shirt and take one picture a year with me to put in the ANews once a month or so. I'm 100% certain these endorsements will help my housing rental company. It will be totally worth it for me.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 1:26 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
Why not let the free market determine "how low" you go?
Free market?

Here's what I'll do when I win the $502 million lottery Friday night. I'll buy one rental house in Athens, and then make it known that I am seeking endorsement deals with Ohio basketball players. I figure I should dole out money based on their recruiting ranking, which I figure is tied to their marketability for my rental company. $25,000 per year for 2 stars. $50,000 per year for three stars. $75,000 per year for four star recruits. $100,000 per year for 5 star recruits. I'll add bonuses if they increase their marketability by, say, winning any individual MAC award or MAC titles. They just need to put on my rental company tee shirt and take one picture a year with me to put in the ANews once a month or so. I'm 100% certain these endorsements will help my housing rental company. It will be totally worth it for me.
Okay. Now explain to me what would be so terribly wrong about this.

On the one side, you have a group of talented people.

On the other side, you have a person with money who has an interest in paying for said talent.

Who is hurt in that arrangement, exactly?
Last Edited: 3/29/2018 1:27:07 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
GoCats105
3/29/2018 1:51 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Why not let the free market determine "how low" you go?
Free market?

Here's what I'll do when I win the $502 million lottery Friday night. I'll buy one rental house in Athens, and then make it known that I am seeking endorsement deals with Ohio basketball players. I figure I should dole out money based on their recruiting ranking, which I figure is tied to their marketability for my rental company. $25,000 per year for 2 stars. $50,000 per year for three stars. $75,000 per year for four star recruits. $100,000 per year for 5 star recruits. I'll add bonuses if they increase their marketability by, say, winning any individual MAC award or MAC titles. They just need to put on my rental company tee shirt and take one picture a year with me to put in the ANews once a month or so. I'm 100% certain these endorsements will help my housing rental company. It will be totally worth it for me.
Okay. Now explain to me what would be so terribly wrong about this.

On the one side, you have a group of talented people.

On the other side, you have a person with money who has an interest in paying for said talent.

Who is hurt in that arrangement, exactly?
The NCAA's long standing "amateur" status that they love to blow up in everyone's face.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 1:55 PM
GoCats105 wrote:expand_more
Why not let the free market determine "how low" you go?
Free market?

Here's what I'll do when I win the $502 million lottery Friday night. I'll buy one rental house in Athens, and then make it known that I am seeking endorsement deals with Ohio basketball players. I figure I should dole out money based on their recruiting ranking, which I figure is tied to their marketability for my rental company. $25,000 per year for 2 stars. $50,000 per year for three stars. $75,000 per year for four star recruits. $100,000 per year for 5 star recruits. I'll add bonuses if they increase their marketability by, say, winning any individual MAC award or MAC titles. They just need to put on my rental company tee shirt and take one picture a year with me to put in the ANews once a month or so. I'm 100% certain these endorsements will help my housing rental company. It will be totally worth it for me.
Okay. Now explain to me what would be so terribly wrong about this.

On the one side, you have a group of talented people.

On the other side, you have a person with money who has an interest in paying for said talent.

Who is hurt in that arrangement, exactly?
The NCAA's long standing "amateur" status that they love to blow up in everyone's face.
Except the NCAA isn't involved here. All the NCAA would have to do is reduce their restrictions on players making endorsement money, a la the Olympics.
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 2:57 PM

As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore. 

mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 3:15 PM
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.
I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that. If I owned a car dealership in Athens and wanted to pay OU basketball and football players to appear in my commercials or wear a t-shirt around campus, or whatever, I'm not sure I understand why that's such a bad thing.

It seems like the Olympics has found a balance between amatuerism and allowing athletes to make money and fund their training through endorsements and what amount to 'boosters' making donations.
Last Edited: 3/29/2018 3:18:53 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
person
Maddog13
3/29/2018 4:59 PM
The "Free Market" appears to be okay when it comes to the NCAA, Television Networks, and College institutions making money. It's when the players and their families make money that everyone cries "foul." It reminds me of the brilliant move that the Northwestern Football players did when they unsuccessfully tried to unionize. It is the double standard here that is so infuriating.
mail
person
Ohio69
3/29/2018 5:20 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.
I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.
mail
person
colobobcat66
3/29/2018 6:08 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.
I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.
Sounds like the Yankees in the old days. Not for me either.
Last Edited: 3/29/2018 6:10:41 PM by colobobcat66
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 7:20 PM

Darius Bazley, from Cincinnati Princeton HS, just decommitted from Syracuse so he can go straight to the G-League. 

mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
3/29/2018 7:22 PM
Ohio69 wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.
I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.
Billionaires already try to buy titles, they just do it by putting hundreds of millions of dollars into new arenas, dorm rooms, training facilities, coaches salaries, coach buyouts, etc. You think that money going directly to players instead of just "the program" is going to suddenly alter the playing field that substantially? Has interest in Oregon athletics decreased since Phil Knight started funding their athletic department?

I'm sympathetic to your point. Maybe college basketball would be less interesting if players could make endorsement money. But even if you believe it might have a negative impact on your interest in the product, that doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to me. When you boil that down, aren't you basically telling talented people that they can't make money off of their talents because it's more compelling entertainment when they dont?
Last Edited: 3/29/2018 7:30:12 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 7:55 PM

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.


I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.


Billionaires already try to buy titles, they just do it by putting hundreds of millions of dollars into new arenas, dorm rooms, training facilities, coaches salaries, coach buyouts, etc. You think that money going directly to players instead of just "the program" is going to suddenly alter the playing field that substantially? Has interest in Oregon athletics decreased since Phil Knight started funding their athletic department?

I'm sympathetic to your point. Maybe college basketball would be less interesting if players could make endorsement money. But even if you believe it might have a negative impact on your interest in the product, that doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to me. When you boil that down, aren't you basically telling talented people that they can't make money off of their talents because it's more compelling entertainment when they dont?

 

There's obviously no right or wrong answer here. But even professional leagues, like the NFL and NBA, have salary caps to help level the playing field. An improved G-League experience will help to sort this out. Players can realize their value immediately. It will probably help better prepare them for the NBA as well.

mail
person
BillyTheCat
3/29/2018 8:39 PM
bornacatfan wrote:expand_more
Why not just let players make endorsement money? If Nike thinks it can make money by paying Bagley to wear Nike's, what's the harm in letting Bagley have that money?
HOw low do you go? High school? 6th graders with potential being paid to wear Nikes? "my baby gon to be the nexxx LayBron" is heard in gyms everywhere already...

Can't imagine how many parents will be pimpin out their kids if that goes through. Kind of a never ending rabbit hole once you go down it. Preserving amatuerism i s the key line in there. How does that affect college sports once you take that away? Have you ever followed Bagley's parents social media? What is in that article just scratches the surface and like Bagley's parents responses...much of what goes on will never see the light of day.
Bingo! We live in a society where we rank8 year olds and televise youth sports. How low do you go?
mail
person
BillyTheCat
3/29/2018 8:46 PM
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.


I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.


Billionaires already try to buy titles, they just do it by putting hundreds of millions of dollars into new arenas, dorm rooms, training facilities, coaches salaries, coach buyouts, etc. You think that money going directly to players instead of just "the program" is going to suddenly alter the playing field that substantially? Has interest in Oregon athletics decreased since Phil Knight started funding their athletic department?

I'm sympathetic to your point. Maybe college basketball would be less interesting if players could make endorsement money. But even if you believe it might have a negative impact on your interest in the product, that doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to me. When you boil that down, aren't you basically telling talented people that they can't make money off of their talents because it's more compelling entertainment when they dont?

There's obviously no right or wrong answer here. But even professional leagues, like the NFL and NBA, have salary caps to help level the playing field. An improved G-League experience will help to sort this out. Players can realize their value immediately. It will probably help better prepare them for the NBA as well.
G-League salary is $25-40k or roughly the same value of a years college scholarship, yet provides zero for the kid who does not make it. Where a college education gives other opportunities
mail
Ted Thompson
3/29/2018 10:03 PM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As Ohio69 is pointing out, endorsements would just be a conduit for boosters to pay players. You could be going down the path of eliminating college basketball. Which some would be OK with but the NCAA would kinda/sorta not need to exist anymore.


I certainly understand that's what would happen. I just don't understand what's bad about that.

Hmmmm.... Well.... What's the fun in watching a rich guy buy titles? There's nothing sporting about it. At least in the current set up in the MAC all the teams are mostly on equal footing (# scholarships, budgets, facilites, etc.) and you can truly compete for a title.

Once a rich guy just starts buying MAC titles, what's the point? We are better because billionaire dude spent money? I'm not interested in that at all.


Billionaires already try to buy titles, they just do it by putting hundreds of millions of dollars into new arenas, dorm rooms, training facilities, coaches salaries, coach buyouts, etc. You think that money going directly to players instead of just "the program" is going to suddenly alter the playing field that substantially? Has interest in Oregon athletics decreased since Phil Knight started funding their athletic department?

I'm sympathetic to your point. Maybe college basketball would be less interesting if players could make endorsement money. But even if you believe it might have a negative impact on your interest in the product, that doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to me. When you boil that down, aren't you basically telling talented people that they can't make money off of their talents because it's more compelling entertainment when they dont?

There's obviously no right or wrong answer here. But even professional leagues, like the NFL and NBA, have salary caps to help level the playing field. An improved G-League experience will help to sort this out. Players can realize their value immediately. It will probably help better prepare them for the NBA as well.
G-League salary is $25-40k or roughly the same value of a years college scholarship, yet provides zero for the kid who does not make it. Where a college education gives other opportunities
I agree but the kids we're talking about aren't getting a college education. They are there for a semester, maybe two.
Showing Messages: 1 - 25 of 37
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)