pythagoras
Well-Known Member
Just so others who may not know. There are scholarships that exist today that are taxable.
California Gives NCAA The Middle Finger
- Thread starter Fryowa
- Start date
- Status
Just so others who may not know. There are scholarships that exist today that are taxable.
Motigerhawk
Well-Known Member
They will be amateurs. They are not being paid to play. They are just profiting off themselves, like every other human in this country is allowed to do
I know what the unintended consequences will be. Some booster will pay the next big thing 6 figures for his autograph on the letter to play at the U of whatever. Kind of like Cam Newton.
The rich always get richer. Thats how stuff works. I dont see why these kids dont get their share. That is just wrong.
I know what the unintended consequences will be. Some booster will pay the next big thing 6 figures for his autograph on the letter to play at the U of whatever. Kind of like Cam Newton.
The rich always get richer. Thats how stuff works. I dont see why these kids dont get their share. That is just wrong.
Fryowa
Administrator
Only scholarships/fellowships given to people who are not in a degree program are taxable.
The only part of a degree-seeking scholarship that's taxable is the portion used for non-qualifying expenses like room and board. That part has always been taxable. Books, equipment, supplies, etc. are all tax-free.
So to be clear, we're talking scholarships for people in a degree-seeking program in all of these examples. Those are tax-free whether it's for engineering, music, sports, general academic, etc.
Motigerhawk
Well-Known Member
I always thought football and basketball should be majors for those kids that are going to try and go pro. Esp. the one and dones and the 3 and dones,,
Fryowa
Administrator
Just so we're crystal clear here, you're saying that you're a capitalist, but you don't want the "rules" of capitalism to apply to a certain group of people because it will mess up one of your pastimes...
Gotcha.
SteveGarvey1
Well-Known Member
Not what I'm saying at all. The genie is out of the bottle, NCAA fat cats have been making money hand over fist in college sports and since that's the way it is, the players should also be able to make money as well in this system. I get that and, looking at the reality of the situation, I think it's appropriate.
I just don't think every single sponsored activity or competition has to have an obsession about making money as an integral part of it. When there was so much less obsession about money when it came to college sports, it did seem more special and wholesome.
And, while it's totally appropriate that players are able to make money out of their likeness, there will be unintended consequences, which will detract from what college sports is supposed to be about. Or what it was about a few decades ago.
Is that better?
hawkihayes
Well-Known Member
Will be interesting to see how the NCAA manages social media and how KF will address player's freedom to use more social media. I remember the NCAA going after an athlete that profited from a Youtube page a year of so ago. If KF holds the line on social media the players could potentially have a legitimate case that KF is limiting their ability to reap a profit. The other thought is this could take years to complete so may be it's BF or a different Head Coach that has to deal with this new rule. So many opportunities for unintended consequences I fear.
Fryowa
Administrator
The no Twitter rule will leave with KF.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
Seeing what a telegenic cult figure he has made himself in his brief NFL career, could you imagine what George Kittle could have made off his name during his Iowa career?
Motigerhawk
Well-Known Member
The "honey pot" schools already get the best of the best. Is Romney that dumb? Or just ignorant?
Money is going to go where money wants to go and athletes are going to go where they perceive their best chance to succeed is.
Money is going to go where money wants to go and athletes are going to go where they perceive their best chance to succeed is.
Fryowa
Administrator
I understand what you're saying, but just by the very nature of your bolded statement, you're implying that you think there should be some sort of restrictions or different rules applied to a subset of people strictly because you don't want the nature of your pastime to change. You're saying, "I think college players should be able to make money, but I don't think there has to be money involved in this." You can't have your cake and eat it too.
And before you think that this has anything to do with players being greedy or anything else, this is unequivocally, 100% the NCAA's own fault. They are reaping what they've been sowing for the past 50 years.
They call it maintaining the sanctity of amateurism, which by definition means doing something without making money from it. Yet they make billions in profits off of college basketball and football players' likenesses. Mark Emmert makes $4 million every year because people want to watch Zion Williamson and Tua Tagovailoa play sports, not because he's good at scheduling lacrosse seasons or deciding on golf tournament rules, man. Let's not kid ourselves...But a guy like Kyler Schott or Brady Ross would get kicked out of school if they went back to one of their hometowns and did a radio ad for the local grocery store for $200 or whatever.
The NCAA has had a no exceptions, 100% lockdown, take it or leave it policy for years and made billions. But you agree with Gary Barta that it's a bad idea and shouldn't happen? You said that in your first post. Maybe if they had allowed certain concessions or certain levels of income, or whatever (something at least), they wouldn't be in this position.
Blame the NCAA for ruining the NCAA, not lawmakers or players. This ain't RUDY, RUDY, RUDY, win one for the Gipper anymore, and it's the NCAA board of governors' fault alone.
Last edited:
SteveGarvey1
Well-Known Member
I don't disagree that it's all the NCAA's own fault.
I do hearken back to the old days and believe it was a better time for college sports. Yeah, I'll own that.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Great, so he's saying Congress may get involved to mandate equality. Can this asshat just go away? Zion is a more marketable athlete than Lil' Lick.
kicker22
Well-Known Member
Would that be the old days when the players were getting paid under the table? I get your argument, but unfortunately I think we can all agree that some (if not most) of the elite players were getting paid back then as well. This just gives the athletes the same opportunities the NCAA, Universities, and media makes off their likeness.
ModebaSan
Well-Known Member
I’m not really feeling it when it comes to the Name, Likeness, Image proposal. Some athletes would enjoy advantages that some other players may not get. How about we just make it an even playing field and pay every athlete, in every divisional sport, under NCAA guidelines, an equal sum of an equal monthly payment also subject to taxes, Soc.Sec., and Medicare deductions. Seems a bit fairer to me.
Maybe a compromise is if a player is on scholarship, that player has to declare each year if they accept the scholarship or if they turn down the scholarship and accept endorsements, although, there could be a smaller amount, say $3-5K per year, that would be exempt from that.
So if a kid is getting a scholarship worth 40,000 per year, they could accept that plus the exempt amount for spending money and smaller endorsements and thus would have to get an endorsement deal worth more than 45K to make it make sense. If a kid wants to accept a 250,000 deal from a shoe company, they deny the scholarship and pay their own way.
So if a kid is getting a scholarship worth 40,000 per year, they could accept that plus the exempt amount for spending money and smaller endorsements and thus would have to get an endorsement deal worth more than 45K to make it make sense. If a kid wants to accept a 250,000 deal from a shoe company, they deny the scholarship and pay their own way.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
A right winger for socialist policies? How interesting..
- Status
