I know it was about basketball and football -- the revenue generating sports -- but I just heard some talking heads, who seemed to know that they were talking about, suggesting that this is the beginning of the end for certain non-revenue generating sports -- specifically wrestling and baseball.
Thoughts?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I know it was about basketball and football -- the revenue generating sports -- but I just heard some talking heads, who seemed to know that they were talking about, suggesting that this is the beginning of the end for certain non-revenue generating sports -- specifically wrestling and baseball.
Thoughts?
A majority of sports talk show hosts are clueless morons who make mountains out of mole hills to create news. Otherwise they would have nothing to discuss. I'd wait for a higher source of concern than a talk show host before I got concerned.
Actually College Baseball may be on the Cusp of becoming a revenue sport for the bigger conferences. Between the Conference networks and ESPN the Content helps fill the airwaves after the basketball tournament ends into the summer.
I'd be looking for baseball to extend its season and not end the regular season until late May or early June. From there the CWS tournament will run through June and possibly into July. There is money to be had there.
Understand that this has nothing to do with "pay for play." A lot of the talking heads fail to make this clear.
The case is about what is called, in legal circles, commercial appropriation of a likeness. It's considered a form of invasion of privacy. In some states it's actually addressed by statute. Where it isn't, it's still recognized in court by virtue of centuries of case law.
What it says is, you can't use my name and my likeness to make money without either getting my consent or otherwise paying me.
The NCAA tried to argue that it got to keep things like video game revenue because paying the athletes would jeopardize their amateur status. The court wasn't buying it. The reality is, the NCAA was stupidly arrogant to have video games out there using not just generic figures in UCLA uniforms, but images of some guy who looks a lot like O'Bannon wearing O'Bannon's number in a UCLA jersey and with the name "O'Bannon" emblazoned across the back.
What the NCAA does now is, it either cuts that stuff out, or it finds some way to pay the people off whose names and likenesses it is profiting.
How does this affect baseball? Probably not one whit. I don't know that NCAA baseball is the subject of video games or other instances of this. It's pretty much confined to the bigger schools and to their football and basketball programs. Also, this was NCAA revenue, not schools' revenue. So it shouldn't pinch schools' budgets at all and thus, it shouldn't threaten the non-revenue or semi-revenue sports.
The world is not coming to an end. It's just one more way that the world is trying to tell the NCAA that it is not above the law. As with the Andy Oliver case, it's a message the NCAA seems determined not to hear, but people who think like that tend to end up in court a lot.
I doubt the NCAA will end the practice -- since it seems to generate a lot of money. They will find some way to compensate athletes, assuming the decision stands.
But then will that raise Title IX implications? That's the angle I heard being discussed by some talking heads -- who may or may not know what they are talking about, I admit. But they also seemed to be saying that even though this isn't directly about pay for play, it's the first step in athletes getting fairly compensated. And once that culture take holds.....
I doubt the NCAA will end the practice -- since it seems to generate a lot of money. They will find some way to compensate athletes, assuming the decision stands.
But then will that raise Title IX implications? That's the angle I heard being discussed by some talking heads -- who may or may not know what they are talking about, I admit. But they also seemed to be saying that even though this isn't directly about pay for play, it's the first step in athletes getting fairly compensated. And once that culture take holds.....
Then it all becomes taxable income, right? Let's see, athletes get "paid" $60k for tuition, room & board; $20k for professional coaching; $10k for access to training facilities…they better get a boatload of "salary" to pay the tax bill on the other stuff.
Money coming from the NCAA would not trigger any Title IX responsibilities, because those pertain only to what the college pays out.
Scholarships are specifically exempt from income taxation. But yes, if they start paying over and above the cost of the education itself, there will be a tax liability. All the "O'Bannon money" that might come from the NCAA will be non-wage taxable income.
I doubt anything other than cash itself would become taxable. All kind of employers provide amenities like free beverages, food, etc. without it being table income. Weight Rooms, trainers etc. are nothing more than employer provided equipment and staff there to enable you to complete your job duties, like a PC, telephone or labor.
All not taxable.
Would Congress rewrite the laws in response to all of this. I don't want to think about that too much.
