From ESPN:

Looks like a uniform policy is coming. Exactly what it will be is still the question.

Quote:U.S. Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., spent Wednesday drumming up support for a proposed bill that could make it possible for all U.S. college athletes to accept endorsement money as early as January 2021.

Quote:"The reality is Congress is going to act," U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said Wednesday. "We're coming for you, [NCAA]."

Romney participated in a roundtable discussion with several other politicians, advocates and others involved in the sports world such as NFL Players Association attorney Joe Briggs and ESPN college basketball analyst Jay Bilas. Romney told ESPN he was committed to finding a better way to compensate college athletes. He said he plans to spend at least the next several weeks gathering perspectives from a variety of interested parties to hear their ideas on how best to move forward.

Quote:Anthony Gonzalez, a former NFL wide receiver and a current Republican House member from Ohio, is also planning to propose a slightly different federal bill after the NCAA meets at the end of the month. Gonzalez told ESPN he believes athletes should be able to make endorsement money, but that there should be "guardrails" put in place as part of the new policy to prevent negative consequences.

(10-17-2019 12:35 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  From ESPN:

Looks like a uniform policy is coming. Exactly what it will be is still the question.

Quote:U.S. Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., spent Wednesday drumming up support for a proposed bill that could make it possible for all U.S. college athletes to accept endorsement money as early as January 2021.

Quote:"The reality is Congress is going to act," U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said Wednesday. "We're coming for you, [NCAA]."

Romney participated in a roundtable discussion with several other politicians, advocates and others involved in the sports world such as NFL Players Association attorney Joe Briggs and ESPN college basketball analyst Jay Bilas. Romney told ESPN he was committed to finding a better way to compensate college athletes. He said he plans to spend at least the next several weeks gathering perspectives from a variety of interested parties to hear their ideas on how best to move forward.

Quote:Anthony Gonzalez, a former NFL wide receiver and a current Republican House member from Ohio, is also planning to propose a slightly different federal bill after the NCAA meets at the end of the month. Gonzalez told ESPN he believes athletes should be able to make endorsement money, but that there should be "guardrails" put in place as part of the new policy to prevent negative consequences.

This is going to happen. It's not an "if or when" situation. There is, however, an interesting opportunity that so far has not really been mentioned and explored as completely as it should be. Involve the IOC or at least the USOC. Indorsements are permitted under guidelines by the Olympic Committee. Streamline the NCAA sports with the IOC guidelines and you'll never have a question of acceptability of athletes who also want to participate in the Olympics. If we don't take advantage of that it will only mean more problems in the future.

As far as Romney goes, he's just looking for some political gravitas and shouldn't be trusted. I'd be much more likely to desire the input from Gonzalez who at least knows the ins and outs from a players perspective and now has more of an understanding of the athletic management and the schools viewpoint as well.

(10-17-2019 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  Streamline the NCAA sports with the IOC guidelines and you'll never have a question of acceptability of athletes who also want to participate in the Olympics.

That makes sense. Athletes who might be in the Olympics as well as college sports should have just one set of guidelines to follow.

As far as the Olympic committee goes, I would caution one thing...

If there's a more inept, bureaucratic, and stubborn group than the NCAA then it's the IOC. Basically any international sports body is a mess by its very nature.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be involved, but I would be careful how much authority is delegated to them. If for no other reason than this: two separate bureaucratic bodies with separate interests trying to come to an agreement on how to handle one problem, I wouldn't bet a lot of money that ends well.

It's absolutely reasonable that athletes should basically have one standard, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith in the NCAA and the IOC to agree what that standard should be.

Probably no need to involve the IOC. Just take the standard for endorsements they already have in place, and run with it unless everyone agrees there is a compelling reason to make the rules different.

(10-17-2019 01:57 PM)Wedge Wrote:  Probably no need to involve the IOC. Just take the standard for endorsements they already have in place, and run with it unless everyone agrees there is a compelling reason to make the rules different.

Precisely. I'm not endorsing the IOC, just saying let's save a damned headache for the kids and make sure that what the Congress passes works for both.

Sort of off-topic but it appears Senators Murphy and Romney will shoot for more comprehensive reform:

Quote:"The NCAA Board of Governors finally recognized that change is coming, and they need to adapt their rules to catch up with the times. We believe those rules must be changed to allow athletes to be compensated. The name, image and likeness approach has its own challenges that we must address, and we’ll be carefully reviewing the NCAA's next steps and working on ways Congress can reform college sports," said Romney and Murphy. "We need to correct the inequities between what college coaches and the institutions make versus what the athletes receive and protect college athletes' health and educational opportunities."

Murphy has criticized the time constraints placed on college athletes and the inability of some to pursue desired degree programs. (See here and here.)

Seems likely that the Murphy/Romney bill will address that somehow. Guessing they would have schools place more limitations on the amount of time athletes can spend on athletics and/or require that they allow athletes to attend school part-time if they like, along with the requirement of degree completion funding after eligibility's up.

??

(10-31-2019 10:46 PM)chester Wrote:  Sort of off-topic but it appears Senators Murphy and Romney will shoot for more comprehensive reform:

Quote:"The NCAA Board of Governors finally recognized that change is coming, and they need to adapt their rules to catch up with the times. We believe those rules must be changed to allow athletes to be compensated. The name, image and likeness approach has its own challenges that we must address, and we’ll be carefully reviewing the NCAA's next steps and working on ways Congress can reform college sports," said Romney and Murphy. "We need to correct the inequities between what college coaches and the institutions make versus what the athletes receive and protect college athletes' health and educational opportunities."

Murphy has criticized the time constraints placed on college athletes and the inability of some to pursue desired degree programs. (See here and here.)

Seems likely that the Murphy/Romney bill will address that somehow. Guessing they would have schools place more limitations on the amount of time athletes can spend on athletics and/or require that they allow athletes to attend school part-time if they like, along with the requirement of degree completion funding after eligibility's up.

??

A five-year guaranteed scholarship with 4 years of athletic eligibility? That probably should've been done already [assuming the schools actually care about education...]

Mitt Romney....lol.
When Mitch McConnell gets involved something will happen. If Mitch thinks it will hurt college athletics, it won’t even be brought to the floor for a vote.

(10-17-2019 01:10 PM)JRsec Wrote:  

(10-17-2019 12:35 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  From ESPN:

Looks like a uniform policy is coming. Exactly what it will be is still the question.

Quote:U.S. Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., spent Wednesday drumming up support for a proposed bill that could make it possible for all U.S. college athletes to accept endorsement money as early as January 2021.

Quote:"The reality is Congress is going to act," U.S. Sen. Mitt Romney, R-Utah, said Wednesday. "We're coming for you, [NCAA]."

Romney participated in a roundtable discussion with several other politicians, advocates and others involved in the sports world such as NFL Players Association attorney Joe Briggs and ESPN college basketball analyst Jay Bilas. Romney told ESPN he was committed to finding a better way to compensate college athletes. He said he plans to spend at least the next several weeks gathering perspectives from a variety of interested parties to hear their ideas on how best to move forward.

Quote:Anthony Gonzalez, a former NFL wide receiver and a current Republican House member from Ohio, is also planning to propose a slightly different federal bill after the NCAA meets at the end of the month. Gonzalez told ESPN he believes athletes should be able to make endorsement money, but that there should be "guardrails" put in place as part of the new policy to prevent negative consequences.

This is going to happen. It's not an "if or when" situation. There is, however, an interesting opportunity that so far has not really been mentioned and explored as completely as it should be. Involve the IOC or at least the USOC. Indorsements are permitted under guidelines by the Olympic Committee. Streamline the NCAA sports with the IOC guidelines and you'll never have a question of acceptability of athletes who also want to participate in the Olympics. If we don't take advantage of that it will only mean more problems in the future.

As far as Romney goes, he's just looking for some political gravitas and shouldn't be trusted. I'd be much more likely to desire the input from Gonzalez who at least knows the ins and outs from a players perspective and now has more of an understanding of the athletic management and the schools viewpoint as well.

Exactly...

(11-01-2019 10:52 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-31-2019 10:46 PM)chester Wrote:  Sort of off-topic but it appears Senators Murphy and Romney will shoot for more comprehensive reform:

Quote:"The NCAA Board of Governors finally recognized that change is coming, and they need to adapt their rules to catch up with the times. We believe those rules must be changed to allow athletes to be compensated. The name, image and likeness approach has its own challenges that we must address, and we’ll be carefully reviewing the NCAA's next steps and working on ways Congress can reform college sports," said Romney and Murphy. "We need to correct the inequities between what college coaches and the institutions make versus what the athletes receive and protect college athletes' health and educational opportunities."

Murphy has criticized the time constraints placed on college athletes and the inability of some to pursue desired degree programs. (See here and here.)

Seems likely that the Murphy/Romney bill will address that somehow. Guessing they would have schools place more limitations on the amount of time athletes can spend on athletics and/or require that they allow athletes to attend school part-time if they like, along with the requirement of degree completion funding after eligibility's up.

??

A five-year guaranteed scholarship with 4 years of athletic eligibility? That probably should've been done already [assuming the schools actually care about education...]

A few ideas I've seen tossed out in years past.

1. Athletes get 5 years to play 5 seasons...no redshirts. The NCAA debated this one for a while if I'm not mistaken.

Not a bad idea in my estimation. The old redshirt rules made sense on a certain level, but with the new transfer rules, something had to be changed. The new redshirt rules are an improvement in theory, but we've already seen players use it in a way it was never intended and hurt their teams in the process. I think it would be better to scrap them all together. Certainly, we can make an exception for a medical issue, but giving a kid 5 years to be utilized however best helps the team seems to make more sense.

In addition, a lot of kids will never go pro or they will only be a pro for a short time. Why not allow them to stick around a little longer and contribute?

2. No cap on the academic side of the scholarship. I heard Mark Ingram voice his support for this a while back.

Also a good idea. Basically, if a guy plays for your school then there's no limit on how much you are allowed to spend on his education. In other words, if a guy leaves early and comes back to get his degree...it's paid for. If he comes back for a Masters...it's paid for. If he comes back for a Doctorate...it's paid for. I guess you'd have to come with up with some standards as far as how long a guy plays for you before he's eligible for that benefit. You wouldn't want a guy playing a single game and all of a sudden being eligible for unlimited funds, but I'm sure there's a middle ground.

3. A graduation bonus.

If a guy graduates then he gets a cash bonus. We could debate on the figure, but basically offer a player the opportunity to complete his degree and then be compensated for his efforts. Again, a lot of guys won't go pro and many who do go pro won't be there long or make a great deal of money. Give people more of an incentive to take their education seriously.

(11-02-2019 08:28 PM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(11-01-2019 10:52 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(10-31-2019 10:46 PM)chester Wrote:  Sort of off-topic but it appears Senators Murphy and Romney will shoot for more comprehensive reform:

Quote:"The NCAA Board of Governors finally recognized that change is coming, and they need to adapt their rules to catch up with the times. We believe those rules must be changed to allow athletes to be compensated. The name, image and likeness approach has its own challenges that we must address, and we’ll be carefully reviewing the NCAA's next steps and working on ways Congress can reform college sports," said Romney and Murphy. "We need to correct the inequities between what college coaches and the institutions make versus what the athletes receive and protect college athletes' health and educational opportunities."

Murphy has criticized the time constraints placed on college athletes and the inability of some to pursue desired degree programs. (See here and here.)

Seems likely that the Murphy/Romney bill will address that somehow. Guessing they would have schools place more limitations on the amount of time athletes can spend on athletics and/or require that they allow athletes to attend school part-time if they like, along with the requirement of degree completion funding after eligibility's up.

??

A five-year guaranteed scholarship with 4 years of athletic eligibility? That probably should've been done already [assuming the schools actually care about education...]

A few ideas I've seen tossed out in years past.

1. Athletes get 5 years to play 5 seasons...no redshirts. The NCAA debated this one for a while if I'm not mistaken.

Not a bad idea in my estimation. The old redshirt rules made sense on a certain level, but with the new transfer rules, something had to be changed. The new redshirt rules are an improvement in theory, but we've already seen players use it in a way it was never intended and hurt their teams in the process. I think it would be better to scrap them all together. Certainly, we can make an exception for a medical issue, but giving a kid 5 years to be utilized however best helps the team seems to make more sense.

In addition, a lot of kids will never go pro or they will only be a pro for a short time. Why not allow them to stick around a little longer and contribute?

2. No cap on the academic side of the scholarship. I heard Mark Ingram voice his support for this a while back.

Also a good idea. Basically, if a guy plays for your school then there's no limit on how much you are allowed to spend on his education. In other words, if a guy leaves early and comes back to get his degree...it's paid for. If he comes back for a Masters...it's paid for. If he comes back for a Doctorate...it's paid for. I guess you'd have to come with up with some standards as far as how long a guy plays for you before he's eligible for that benefit. You wouldn't want a guy playing a single game and all of a sudden being eligible for unlimited funds, but I'm sure there's a middle ground.

3. A graduation bonus.

If a guy graduates then he gets a cash bonus. We could debate on the figure, but basically offer a player the opportunity to complete his degree and then be compensated for his efforts. Again, a lot of guys won't go pro and many who do go pro won't be there long or make a great deal of money. Give people more of an incentive to take their education seriously.

Hokie Mark, yeah, it's unfortunate but, despite what the NCAA says about athletes being "students first," the notion that this or that school actually does care about their athletes' education is not a given.

ATU, I like all of those ideas, and will add that there is a (currently staid) court-ordered injunction against the denial of "post-eligibility scholarships to complete undergraduate and graduate degrees at any school." A good thing, that.

As for Congress, I'm usually against their meddling, but the NCAA really does need a good shaking.