"The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

The commissioners of the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern Conference sent a letter dated May 23 to congressional leaders. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the letter Friday. Stadium, the online sports network, first reported on the letter.

The letter was signed by John Swofford of the ACC, Bob Bowlsby of the Big 12, Kevin Warren of the Big Ten, Larry Scott of the Pac-12 and Greg Sankey of the SEC.

They encouraged federal lawmakers to not wait for the NCAA process to play out before passing a national law that would set parameters for college athletes to be compensated for use of their names, images and likenesses.

“I don’t think it’s indicative of anything other than our belief that the five of us bring substantial equity to college athletics and that our brands are strong,” Bowlsby said Friday during a conference call with reporters."







https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/0...-athletes/

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

In essence, it seems to me that the commissioners are asking Congress to embed in federal law the fiction that college athletes are not being paid to play their sport.

“First, those who participate in collegiate athletics are students, not employees. A critical aspect of the college model has been and remains that student-athletes are not paid for playing sports,” the commissioners wrote.

During my lifetime, the most talented athletes have always received something of value in exchange for playing their sport for dear old State U. And if they don't play, that something of value is withdrawn. That sounds a lot like pay for play to me. Up until now, that something amounted to something less than minimum wage, except possibly for those athletes who actually value the education itself. Otherwise, they are just playing for room and board, and anything they can get under the table from boosters.

With NIL, does it really matter if the athletes are paid to play by someone acting as a surrogate for the school instead of directly by the school? Their NILs are only valuable if they play, and like scholarships the payments will stop when they stop playing.

None of this is to say that there isn't a legitimate federal role to be played in all this. Much of intercollegiate athletics is, at its core, a commercial enterprise, and it is conducted across state lines. Interstate commerce has been regulated for a very long time - almost as long as star athletes have been paid to play. Uniformity of the rules is in everybody's interest, and lack of uniformity will seriously undermine intercollegiate athletics. As a fan I don't want to see that evolve in the absence of federal regulation.

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

I do think the commissioners need to be very careful what they wish for. Congress could very well respond by declaring that, as a matter of law, all scholarship athletes are employees of the school.

I can only hope Congress decides to tax these obviously for-profit programs that spend money like NFL franchises while getting free labor.

It seems like they are hoping Congress will outline and implement an NCAA friendly version of the NIL that would take some of the pressure off the NCAA when they release their NIL rules full of limitations and added stipulations for the sake of amateurism.

(05-30-2020 09:13 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

I do think the commissioners need to be very careful what they wish for. Congress could very well respond by declaring that, as a matter of law, all scholarship athletes are employees of the school.

Their nightmare is 50 different state laws. And that is starting to happen

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Whether Congress would take this matter up in the middle of the pandemic is an open question, but I honestly don’t think this issue is contentious. I think much of this board *really* underestimates the bipartisan and general public support for athlete compensation (at least for likenesses in an Olympic-model fashion) and *really* overestimates any support for the NCAA and restricting athlete compensation. Weirdly enough, I think the NCAA has a higher approval rating on this forum than it does with the rest of America (which is saying something because half of our threads probably devolve into some tangent on how the NCAA is terrible or should be broken up). Most of the rest of society - Democrat or Republican - doesn’t buy the NCAA position on these issues at all.

Like I mentioned months ago, this is a perfect bipartisan political winner. Democrats get to argue that they’re protecting the interests of athletes that are (in their minds) exploited for huge profits by huge universities, TV networks and corporate sponsors. Republicans get to argue that getting compensation for one’s own likeness is a basic free market principle and are able to stick it to the leaders of academia that they loathe so much. I’m telling you - this is a political slam dunk. Anyone worrying about how Alabama or Ohio State can take advantage of this type of new athlete compensation regime is failing to see the forest for the trees on this issue - the athletes are *overwhelmingly* winning this argument in the public sphere on both sides of the aisle. The Power Five know that this is the case and that’s why they want to get ahead of it so that they can help dictate the rules as opposed to having rules dictated to them.

As bullet mentions above, the worst thing that can happen is 50 different state standards. There’s a true need for federal legislation here.

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Isn't there potential for creating a slippery slope? How much government involvement does the world of college athletics want?

(05-30-2020 03:00 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Isn't there potential for creating a slippery slope? How much government involvement does the world of college athletics want?

The government control genie is long ago out of the bottle. State governments have already made it clear that they will begin exercising control over college football if the Feds dont act. My position for some time has been the only way the college game survives in any form remotely resembling the current model is with a anti-trust exemption. Its clear to me at this point the FBS schools have reached the same conclusion. As for this specific request for legislation---I think the P5 and NCAA (G5 too) know its going to be way easier to deal with a single law from the federal government than dealing with various NIL laws from 50 different state legislatures. I suspect this is just the first step in their quest for an anti-trust exemption.

(05-30-2020 03:52 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 03:00 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Isn't there potential for creating a slippery slope? How much government involvement does the world of college athletics want?

The government control genie is long ago out of the bottle. State governments have already made it clear that they will begin exercising control over college football if the Feds dont act. My position for some time has been the only way the college game survives in any form remotely resembling the current model is with a anti-trust exemption. Its clear to me at this point the FBS schools have reached the same conclusion. As for this specific request for legislation---I think the P5 and NCAA (G5 too) know its going to be way easier to deal with a single law from the federal government than dealing with various NIL laws from 50 different state legislatures. think this is just the first step in their quest for an anti-trust exemption.

It's not uncommon for lobbyists to actually draft proposed legislation that fully meets their needs and wants, rather than leave it up to Congress to craft their own bill. I don't know if the commissioners have done this, or for that matter whether doing so would require that they register as lobbyists. But if I were them, I wouldn't want this request to be general and open ended. I would want it made explicit that athletes are not employees of the university, even if they receive payments from the school for things beyond tuition, fees and books.

(05-30-2020 10:45 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Whether Congress would take this matter up in the middle of the pandemic is an open question, but I honestly don’t think this issue is contentious. I think much of this board *really* underestimates the bipartisan and general public support for athlete compensation (at least for likenesses in an Olympic-model fashion) and *really* overestimates any support for the NCAA and restricting athlete compensation. Weirdly enough, I think the NCAA has a higher approval rating on this forum than it does with the rest of America (which is saying something because half of our threads probably devolve into some tangent on how the NCAA is terrible or should be broken up). Most of the rest of society - Democrat or Republican - doesn’t buy the NCAA position on these issues at all.

Like I mentioned months ago, this is a perfect bipartisan political winner. Democrats get to argue that they’re protecting the interests of athletes that are (in their minds) exploited for huge profits by huge universities, TV networks and corporate sponsors. Republicans get to argue that getting compensation for one’s own likeness is a basic free market principle and are able to stick it to the leaders of academia that they loathe so much. I’m telling you - this is a political slam dunk. Anyone worrying about how Alabama or Ohio State can take advantage of this type of new athlete compensation regime is failing to see the forest for the trees on this issue - the athletes are *overwhelmingly* winning this argument in the public sphere on both sides of the aisle. The Power Five know that this is the case and that’s why they want to get ahead of it so that they can help dictate the rules as opposed to having rules dictated to them.

As bullet mentions above, the worst thing that can happen is 50 different state standards. There’s a true need for federal legislation here.

Well stated Frank and I agree with you 100% on all of your statements and would like to add that the NCAA position which wants to mitigate the rights of players is a position that no major university or coach wants to support, as they realize how wrong morally that position is and how very unpopular it is with the athletes. It's simply the right thing to do and the sooner and more uniformed the better.

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:30 AM)TerryD Wrote:  "The Power Five conference commissioners are asking Congress to move forward with federal legislation regarding compensation for college athletes.

I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Because the kind of law the NCAA wants may be very different from what players want.

(05-30-2020 06:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Because the kind of law the NCAA wants may be very different from what players want.

It is, and therein lies the justification for a breakaway. Congress however cannot afford to come down on the wrong side of this issue so they will side with the P5. It's an election year and they need to be pro the little guy, particularly in light of recent events in Minnesota. But then that's why they call it politics.

And Frank is correct, the NCAA has little support in reality.

(05-30-2020 06:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:35 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  I think Congress is likely to ignore this. They seemingly have more important things to attend to.

It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Because the kind of law the NCAA wants may be very different from what players want.

The NCAA doesnt make the law. If there is wide agreement among the parties in DC---then the law that gets passed will be what the law that gets passed and the NCAA will just have to deal with it. Reading the tea leaves---the players are going to get most (if not all) of what they want. The NCAA will probably lobby so the Congress maybe throws them a bone that helps reduces the negative affect a bit--but there will be a NIL law passed by the Feds. Its going to happen because there is already wide spread agreement among legislators from either side of the aisle. Besides---whatever they come up with cant be any worse than 50 different laws for each state.

Asking fo legislation based just on a concept is inadequate. Legislators will want to know costs, who pays, what are the parameters, and how such is administered, and how the policies are enforced. This could release antitrust suits, which is a matter for the courts.

You have factions saying the NCAA governing this is inappropriate, while the P5 isn't fully separate and is not comprehensively organized enough to deliver unity and consensus for such a profound undertaking. They wànt Congress to fix the endeavor for them.

Congress has power with the federal military academies, not so much in dictating to state and private colleges in terms of new programs (athletics) for student employment/compensations. Certainly the U.S. Departments of Education and Labor need to weigh-in. Eugene Scalia at Labor may provide an opinion. Good luck finding a brilliant response from Betsy DeVos.

(05-30-2020 06:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 06:42 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 01:04 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(05-30-2020 08:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  It will just get tacked on to some other Bill.

I doubt it, because this will be contentious, requiring lots of hearings and debate. Congress is not going to have any stomach for that, IMO.

But we shall see.

Why would it be contentious? There is mass agreement on both sides of the aisle. Heck, even the NCAA has largely agreed with the premise. Just need a universal law for the entire nation. Given the political divisions we see in Washington these days, this is as close to chip shot as you can get for national legislation in the current environment. It will just end up being a rider tacked on to a more important bill.

Because the kind of law the NCAA wants may be very different from what players want.

The NCAA doesnt make the law. If there is wide agreement among the parties in DC---then the law that gets passed will be what the law that gets passed and the NCAA will just have to deal with it. Reading the tea leaves---the players are going to get most (if not all) of what they want. The NCAA will probably lobby so the Congress maybe throws them a bone that helps reduces the negative affect a bit--but there will be a NIL law passed by the Feds. Its going to happen because there is already wide spread agreement among legislators from either side of the aisle. Besides---whatever they come up with cant be any worse than 50 different laws for each state.

There may be some negative side effects, but there's no justification for the current way that schools have been able to sell posters, jerseys with names and (formerly) names on video games without any compensation or active consent.