Courts are destroying college football
- Thread starter 18IsTheMan
- Start date
No............ it's not the "courts" - the courts are just the means to an end....
Ask yourself what group of people are responsible for ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY every other American institution and traditions that we love....
Then you'll have your real culprits. Hint: it started with the notion that everyone deserved a participation trophy. Then it advanced to "targeting" calls , trying to soften up the game, to then throwing flags for merely looking at the QB, doing everything to turn the game into flag football....
Same people. I promise.
Ask yourself what group of people are responsible for ATTEMPTING TO DESTROY every other American institution and traditions that we love....
Then you'll have your real culprits. Hint: it started with the notion that everyone deserved a participation trophy. Then it advanced to "targeting" calls , trying to soften up the game, to then throwing flags for merely looking at the QB, doing everything to turn the game into flag football....
Same people. I promise.
You're right of course.
They can't stand that there is something people enjoy. They are miserable and want everyone else to be miserable.
Nope, it is not the courts, it is a result of the NCAA sticking their heads in the sand for decades ignoring an issue that they were never going to win on. They could have headed this off decades ago but chose to ignore it until it blew up in their face.
Yes, that's the lazy narrative. Blame the rules.
We definitely can't blame the spoiled rotten brats who have never been told "no" in their entire life and now expect all off society to cater to their every whim. We certainly can't set any expectations or have any accountability or deny anyone anything. That would be cruel!!!!!
Everyone is simply terrified to look one of these kids in the eyes and say "no".
Last edited:
It’s time to have a mega conference and managed by people with some business sense.
I agree. The ncaa rules prohibiting athletes working or getting a reasonable stipend while the schools and coaches made millions was not fair at all. the schools were making serious money off of the athletes NIL. The athletes were forbidden from signing a hat for 10 bucks. But rather than come up with some reasonable rules they put it off until the courts intervened. Coaches getting multiyear multimillion dollar contracts and being able to leave at the drop of the hat while athletes could not was not right.
EXACTLY.
The courts do not operate in a vacuum, or arbitrarily issue rulings on their own volition.
The NCAA had every ample opportunity to deal with the issue of NIL, yet chose to ignore the situation. Eventually the issue was taken to the Supreme Court which ruled 9-0 against the NCAA.
Had the NCAA not been so arrogant and obtuse, but more observant that their argument was to sustain a monopoly, we may have had a more sensible situation.
Yeah, boo hoo, all the poor football player got was a 100% free college education with all the perk imaginable. Absolutely rips my heart out. Injustice!!! Slavery!!!! Modern day lynchings!!!!!!
The kids are not the ones who went against all legal advice and bitterly fought a losing battle in the courts.
I wonder what these pu**ies are gonna do when they get out of their little college football cocoon where they are coddled like the little twa*s the are and some employer actually sets and holds them to expectations and rules and regulations. And absolutely sign me up when someone who doesn't give a rip about their entitled attitude actually says "no" to them.
Absolute meltdown.
Absolute meltdown.
There are so many ways to attack this weak argument “that it wasn’t fair” but I won’t waste my time other than to say it’s not fair to give pampered athletes free room and board, free scholarships, free medical service, free tutoring, etc. while non-athletes, many who become the backbone of society, are relegated to years of paying off school debt. Instead of encouraging the use of our brains, we champion those who can throw/catch a ball.
All so you and I can sit on our couches on Saturdays and be entertained. Ironic, no?
Edit: Professors, like coaches, are employees of the university. Will we argue next that it’s not fair to pay professors and not students? That seems ridiculous but that’s the same logical pathway that made this mess we now call college football.
Last edited:
Negative the courts are doing what is legally right as they should. It’s not the courts fault that the NCAA was built on an illegal system.
because the downfall of college football rests solely on those darn kids who never learned the word ‘no.’ Surely it has nothing to do with decades of exploitative systems that rake in billions while treating players like free labor. Accountability works both ways, doesn’t it? Maybe instead of shaking our fists at the younger generation, we should look at the grown-ups who made the rules in the first place.
Last edited:
Ah, the classic “pampered athletes” argument. Let’s unpack this.
First, those scholarships, room and board, and medical services aren’t freebies—they’re compensation for work. College athletes generate billions for their schools and the NCAA through ticket sales, TV deals, and merchandise. This isn’t just a Saturday hobby; it’s a full-time job with grueling schedules, physical risks, and little time for outside income or internships to prepare for life after sports. That “free tuition” isn’t nearly equivalent to the value they produce.
Second, it’s not a zero-sum game. Supporting athletes doesn’t mean neglecting non-athletes. If the system isn’t fair to non-athletes burdened by debt, maybe we should focus on fixing that—like lobbying for better financial aid, debt forgiveness, or tuition reform—instead of begrudging athletes the modest compensation they do receive.
Finally, your professor analogy doesn’t hold. Professors don’t fill 80,000-seat stadiums or sign multimillion-dollar media deals for universities. If we’re talking about fairness, shouldn’t those who create the lion’s share of revenue get a share of the pie?
The real irony here is criticizing athletes for working hard to entertain us while ignoring the broader inequities of higher education. Instead of tearing down their opportunity, maybe we should be questioning why the system doesn’t serve everyone better.
First, those scholarships, room and board, and medical services aren’t freebies—they’re compensation for work. College athletes generate billions for their schools and the NCAA through ticket sales, TV deals, and merchandise. This isn’t just a Saturday hobby; it’s a full-time job with grueling schedules, physical risks, and little time for outside income or internships to prepare for life after sports. That “free tuition” isn’t nearly equivalent to the value they produce.
Second, it’s not a zero-sum game. Supporting athletes doesn’t mean neglecting non-athletes. If the system isn’t fair to non-athletes burdened by debt, maybe we should focus on fixing that—like lobbying for better financial aid, debt forgiveness, or tuition reform—instead of begrudging athletes the modest compensation they do receive.
Finally, your professor analogy doesn’t hold. Professors don’t fill 80,000-seat stadiums or sign multimillion-dollar media deals for universities. If we’re talking about fairness, shouldn’t those who create the lion’s share of revenue get a share of the pie?
The real irony here is criticizing athletes for working hard to entertain us while ignoring the broader inequities of higher education. Instead of tearing down their opportunity, maybe we should be questioning why the system doesn’t serve everyone better.
Pay for play has been happening for years. Now it is officially legal.
It was anti-American to ban student-athletes from profiting off their own name, image, and likeness, just like any other student in school. The NCAA's inability to see that and make meaningful changes decades ago created the situation we're in now.
It absolutely is the NCAA's fault.
It absolutely is the NCAA's fault.
As I tell any client that I go into litigation with, the goal is to get whatever dispute you have settled in your favor as much as possible. Going into any litigation is a crapshoot and both parties involved are probably going to dislike something about the result. The NCAA is the one that dropped the ball. They saw the game growing financially and they didn't grow with it by clinging onto their Student-Athlete, Players can't be paid ideal. The threw it up to the courts and we have what we have. An example of a stubborn and haughty client that rolled the dice with the game and lost.
Yep. And it does not take a rocket doctor to see they were never going to win that legal battle.
You are going to have to explain to me how a voluntary association of athletic programs made up of members who all agreed to abide by the rules of the association is an illegal system. I don't think you, along with a lot of other people, understand that the NCAA is an ASSOCIATION of members. It is not some govt. organization that stepped in and imposed rules on its members that the members were opposed to. Membership in the association is entirely voluntary, any school that doesn't want to abide by the NCAA rules is free to leave at any time. Any player who does not like the rules he or she is required to follow is free to quit playing any time they want to.
In your mind, are Rotary clubs an illegal system since each club and its members agree to abide by the rules of Rotary? The court was dead wrong in its ruling. Any player who thought they were being mistreated or denied any rights was always free to leave the system with no penalty whatsoever.
You do know what NIL stands for right? They were not allowed to work or profit from pretty much anything. Football is a year round activity. Yeah I'll go with Spurrier on this one..
Steve Spurrier has been a proponent of paying college athletes and believes they should share in the revenue generated by college football:
- 2011
Spurrier proposed that football players receive a $300 stipend per game, paid for by the coach out of their own salary. He said that coaches should share some of their money with players, legally if possible.
- 2012
Spurrier proposed that football and men's basketball players receive a stipend of $3,500–$4,000 per year to cover living, academic, and game-related expenses. He said that coaches believe players deserve more than just room, board, books, and tuition.
- 2022
Spurrier said that college athletes should receive some form of compensation, either through NIL payments or a salary from the school's athletics department. He said that players should be sharing in the pot more.
You can't make up illegal rules and tell your victims they can leave if they don't like it. For example you can't provide gear, gifts and other things to players and then suspend them (A.J. Green) for about a half a season. Those items were his. He wasn't obligated to give them back. Why couldn't a player sell those items. Really had nothing to do with the NCAA. I know as a student at USC I re-sold the books I purchased after completing the class. Is the school going to suspend or expel me for that? No.
Also, why couldn't a player profit from his autograph or picture. It's his or hers, not the schools. It was just a corrupt system that had outlived it's usefulness and the so-called adults in the room, the NCAA, were the last ones to see it.
If athletes truly felt like they were being taken advantage of and exploited and were working harder and producing more than what their compensation package paid for, they were free to quit and leave that horrible system and pay their own way in school and enjoy the life of a regular college student. They could have hired a trainer and an agent and worked to get a tryout with an NFL or NBA team if they really wanted to be a professional football or basketball player.
As to who gets the share of the pie; the person or entity that takes the risk should get the lion's share of the pie. The player has zero financial risk by playing a sport. If they don't play well, they don't start or even get into the game but they don't lose any of their scholarship or other benefits. If the football program has a multi million dollar loss, the player is not asked to come up with his share of the loss. For the player, his only outcome is financial benefit.
The fact you think debt forgiveness is an answer to the financial issues surrounding higher education tells me all I really need to know about how you see the world.
Regular students did not have access to gifts of autographed game jerseys or bowl watches to sell. Green could have sold the items as soon as he was no longer a student athlete, the rule against selling those items would not follow him for the rest of his life, it was not a law. Your books at USC were purchased by you, they were not given to you as part of an athletic scholarship.
The NIL rules were in place to prevent exactly what has happened since they were thrown out. None of the players today are being paid for autographs or Summer camps or appearances at car dealerships, they are being paid BIG money to go to a certain team and play football. The NCAA knew, along with everyone with half a brain, that allowing NIL payments to athletes would lead to blatant cheating and even grosser inequality among the haves and have nots.
....and your line of thinking is the reason why starting QB's get paid 2-3 million dollars a year in college right now. All because you want to protect some fanciful image over a couple hundred dollars.
And therein lies the vulnerability of that argument.
It was associations of athletic programs, but the individuals, players in this case, who were participating, and generating the monies for the programs had no representation. It was merely a matter of time that these players who were in demand for highly prized skill sets would want to be compensated for the millions being generated for their efforts (One of the basic tenants of a free market system)
Since when do rotary clubs make billions and profit off the backs of its members? That comparison is awful. Not to mention the Supreme Court ruled THEY WERE VIOLATING MANY LAWS. Including but not limited to anti-trust laws.
Not to mention that the SCOTUS point-blank said that benefits are not a replacement for monetary compensation. And that att the room and board, tuition, and all the other stuff players were getting was considered benefits in the unanimous eyes of the SCOTUS.
Sorry, but what you’re advocating for is ILLEGAL. That’s why the Supreme Court ruled against it. I wasn’t suggesting we should forgive debt; I don’t agree with that either. I was simply stating that hiring a trainer isn’t a viable option because the NFL won’t give you a chance, and the courts have essentially ruled that. It’s essentially a monopoly. What you’re advocating for goes against almost every principle we stand for as a country. Also, what you call “compensation” is not compensation; it’s legally defined as a benefit. Those are two entirely different things.
What is the difference in a programmer at usc on full academic scholarship, making money writing code, and an athlete making money off an autograph. One has always been ok. The other was not?
The biggest difference was the school making a pile of money off of the athletes while restricting them from making any to preserve the illusion that they are regular students.
I agree I think you need to go back and read my prior post. You’re arguing with the wrong person.
Well I was not arguing with you. I was agreeing with you and giving an answer to your posts question that demonstrated it. Answering a question is not arguing especially when it supports what you were saying.
Thought process: well the NCAA had some bad rules and decisions over the years so that means every rule and decision by the NCAA is bad.
Critical thinking is extinct. I weep for our culture.
Critical thinking is extinct. I weep for our culture.
