NCAA considers post season ban for Cali schools
-
Rut Roh
Quoting the first paragraph
"Earlier this year, state legislators voted – by an overwhelming 31-4 margin in California’s Senate – to allow student-athletes to be able to profit off their name, image and likeness (NIL). This won’t mean anything to most current college athletes, because the statute wouldn’t kick into effect in 2023. There are still a few more policy-making hoops to jump through, but California appears set to be a game-changing agent in the world of amateurism.
Unless the NCAA can convince it otherwise."
-
I’m sure losing a giant market won’t hurt the NCAA at all… California could legit just have their own tournament where all of the attendance proceeds go to the players. All 25 schools in one tournament together. A 20 game tournament would fetch good TV dollars too
-
@Kcmatt7 we lose recruits?
-
This is the dumbest move the NCAA could make. The schools and athletes haven’t broken a single rule. The athletes don’t even have a say in what the legislature is doing, yet they’re the ones who are getting penalized. The California legislature, a lazy bunch of hacks, just gets to virtue signal that they did something that only could result in a bad outcome for athletes, since it’s not like the NCAA will bend here. F the NCAA
-
-
@Kcmatt7 Billy Preston
-
Chuck count?
-
Last Cali kid that played in a regular season game for KU was Merv Lindsay.
-
There’s only been 3 Cali kids play under Self at KU. Omar Wilkes was Self’s first year, but really a Roy recruit and later transferred. Lindsay who transferred, and Billy Preston who never played a meaningful minute for KU.
I’m assuming the last impact player KU had from Cali was Drew Gooden and before him Paul Pierce.
-
Jerod haase
-
Kevin young
-
Withey? These transfers count
-
Charlie Moore…
-
@KUSTEVE I said chuck
-
Charlie is from Chicago
-
@BShark don’t confuse us with facts…we’re on a roll…
-
Roy recruited well out of Cali, but wouldn’t recruit east of the Mississippi. Bill pulls recruits from everywhere and seems to like a harder type than you usually see out of California.
-
Forgot Josh Jackson was from California. I though he was a Michigan kid for some reason.
-
@dylans he just went to Cali for his last year, I think to get him out of the riff raff. Should’ve moved sooner!
-
Josh is Mich all the way
-
California law wouldn’t control what we did in Kansas. So if a California kid went to school at KU, it would have zero effect. California can’t permit him to use his image, and prohibit the NCAA from suspending the kid if the school was outside of California. The proposed California law is nothing but show – another leftist cause where they try to strong arm folks into their view of the world.
The law would simply control California institutions.
The best path is see what California is doing, and do the opposite. They’ve run a beautiful state into the gutter. But we know why that happens.
-
I can’t say I totally understand the law… but I know we have federal copyright protection on images. But the NCAA takes full advantage of being a private organization who can make it’s own rules for their members (including athletes). Federal laws come into play when any group reaches a certain size where the broad public are impacted.
And now we have a State that wants a say in this.
While many are busy viewing US vs Iran… maybe more attention needs to go to California vs NCAA. I can easily see this being decided by the Supreme Court. With our current judges, I would think they would favor the private organization.
Question is: will California up the escalation by threatening to kick the NCAA to the curb? What if several States follow California? Suddenly several conferences get impacted and the damage is systemic.
-
@drgnslayr is on the money here. California has a large enough population and enough schools to become their own division separate from the NCAA. The NCAA can’t get into a staring contest here, because there’s enough media in California that those schools could break from the NCAA and make it work. And if California threatened to do so, I could imagine Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and Nevada could all follow suit. If that were to happen, the other Pac-12 states (Utah, Colorado) would probably come along.
That would change the math on TV contracts. The NCAA makes about 90% of its revenue from the tournament. If the West Coast schools dropped out, that loss of viewership could affect the contract (its likely that viewership numbers are baked into the contract somewhere). Any loss of revenue there would cripple the NCAA financially.
Even a 5% decline in TV revenues would be damaging to the NCAA. I don’t see how the NCAA can win this faceoff.
-
Rex Walters was from Cali
-
bskeet said:
Rex Walters was from Cali
One of my favorites
-
Yes… the first thing I see is the Pac-12 evaporating from the NCAA. What would really spell the end would be if this took off like a grass fire and started burning out of control to the east. I doubt people realize just how big of an economy California is by themselves.
California is the 5th largest economy is the world. Let that soak in.
The pressure would build for other schools to jump on the bandwagon. There would be some kind of organization jumping into this to recruit schools and states and to strategically recruit them from different conferences. It would be a grassroots campaign.
At some point I could see the ShoeCos jumping into this… especially if they get shot in the foot by some of the recently started NCAA investigations targeting violations.
I have a feeling the ShoeCos and sporting goods people are talking to each other and they are waiting for the right opportunity to bounce on the NCAA. Just think about how much revenue isn’t realized every year because the clearinghouse for licensed content is the NCAA… an organization that doesn’t know how to maximize return like a corporation or licensing agency does.
In a capitalist society, eventually money rules everything. How long will this go on? The royalty money potentially paid to athletes is peanuts to the potential revenue streams they would create.
I can think of so many insane graphics possible that fans would go nuts for. The college licensing would run circles around the NBA licensed products. It wouldn’t even be close.
I’m hungry. I want the t-shirt with the image of Wilt, Manning and others and the Jayhawk (of course). I think fans relate players to their teams more than the teams themselves. I have several UNC friends and they would love Jordan/UNC gear with his image.
This effort would be so large that it would positively impact our national economy. It’s that big of new market.
That old NCAA horse is limping and someone needs to step up and be brave and take it out for it’s last trot.
-
drgnslayr said:
California is the 5th largest economy is the world. Let that soak in.
If you remember nothing else from this outstanding post, remember this single line. The California economy is so large, losing it could potentially destroy the NCAA.
With nearly 40M people, California could (on its own) create its own separate division. There are, besides the D1 schools in California, some fairly large D2 institutions that could join as well. There are over 100 schools in California that have an enrollment above 10,000. The 60 or so biggest schools could create their own division with no problem.
This is a fight the NCAA can’t win if California sticks to their guns. Cali is simply too big, with too much money. Add the marketing angle and a California only division would do just fine on its own, with a ready television market to serve.
Meanwhile, the Pac-12 would effectively collapse. Without the Pac-12 to generate West Coast viewership the NCAA would have to shift to being even more East Coast biased to make sure that it held viewership numbers back East. That would leave schools in smaller Midwest and Mountain states out of the loop (i.e. places like Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Arkansas, Colorado, New Mexico, etc.)
The death of the NCAA is coming. California may be pushing them closer to the edge of the cliff than they even realize.
-
justanotherfan said:
drgnslayr said:
California is the 5th largest economy is the world. Let that soak in.
If you remember nothing else from this outstanding post, remember this single line. The California economy is so large, losing it could potentially destroy the NCAA.
With nearly 40M people, California could (on its own) create its own separate division. There are, besides the D1 schools in California, some fairly large D2 institutions that could join as well. There are over 100 schools in California that have an enrollment above 10,000. The 60 or so biggest schools could create their own division with no problem.
This is a fight the NCAA can’t win if California sticks to their guns. Cali is simply too big, with too much money. Add the marketing angle and a California only division would do just fine on its own, with a ready television market to serve.
Meanwhile, the Pac-12 would effectively collapse. Without the Pac-12 to generate West Coast viewership the NCAA would have to shift to being even more East Coast biased to make sure that it held viewership numbers back East. That would leave schools in smaller Midwest and Mountain states out of the loop (i.e. places like Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, Arkansas, Colorado, New Mexico, etc.)
The death of the NCAA is coming. California may be pushing them closer to the edge of the cliff than they even realize.
There are a lot of states that I think could pull off having their own profitable sports league.
- New York
- Texas
- California
- Florida
- North Carolina
- Virginia
- Pennsylvania
- Ohio
- Illinois
Basically any state with a great major market for TV, 1 major program, and 9 other schools to fill the schedule could probably create a profitable league that pays players.
Of course, TV contracts would have to be a tiered system for each league, but I think it would ultimately get schools a better value.
Using California as a hypothetical, and a $250M TV Contract.
- Cal - $35M
- UCLA - $35M
- Stanford - $35M
- USC - $35M
You could then pay the remaining schools all $5M a year, which would be more than double any of their current deals from what I could tell.
-
Another huge area… school athletic programs are having solvency issues. We all think of how much money is in college sports. But the cost to run these programs is astronomical, especially if schools want a competitive program. Think about how many entities have a say in college sports… NCAA, Board of Regents, several areas within the university, state legislatures, federal government in several areas, municipal authorities… lots of watchful eyes, legislation, rules, redundant everything… and it all draws money from the program, directly and indirectly.
All schools, including the blue bloods, can use a real boost in the financial arm. This will trickle down to the athletes beyond whatever royalties they can receive.
