What CFB needs is a 14th amendment, so to speak, because the piece of human garbage plantation owners that run the sport are never going to voluntarily relinquish the key legal driver of their exploitation racket. That being essentially one thing, that laughable joke and crude weapon of 'amateurism' that they insist athletes formally agree and sign on the dotted line to when they accept scholarships.
And it was the destruction of that little clause in the scholarship paperwork that I thought was indeed going to be effectively destroyed by way of the original California legislation, and effectively that was the point of it, though I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of that legislation, but I thought that was the idea.
And the NCAA's response to that threat, genuinely evil institution that it is, is by coming up with their own version which attempts to forestall that by insisting that whatever is decided upon and deigned to be allowed to exist unmolested by the NCAA'S slave police, that 'amateurism' - as they define it and impose it- which is what modern-day sports slavery is, remains untouched. So none of this means shit until phony baloney amateurism is forcibly swept away once and for all.
And that's what the hold up is. As always the NCAA doesn't care about the sport, the players, the fans, nothing.... only its own legal prerogatives and abilities to openly exploit athletes and dominate the proceedings. So this ain't going anywhere until so-called amateurism is destroyed. And then naturally anybody can pay any player what they want, which is what the NCAA - a true force of downright evil in society - is dead set on opposing. Because that's their and has always been their only effective mission: to forcibly impoverish athletes and enrich themselves and member institutions. They are indeed the plantation, and athletes the slaves.
I don’t follow the NCAA, so I don’t have grounds to share your antipathy towards them, nor can I either dispute or vouch for the accuracy of what you’re charging them with. I simply don’t have the fact-base to offer even
comment one as to their aims.
But speaking off the cuff, it looks like they’re protecting their turf which every organization – good or bad – does. The trick to accomplishing that, of course, is to prove in the MARKETPLACE that you haven’t outlived your usefulness.
But what IS clear to me is that Congress can supersede the NCAA if it so chooses. And for doing that, there appears to be considerable sentiment. Certainly no guarantee
at this stage, but real plausibility that fundamental change will occur.
My interest is in how ND – and other institutions that may think similarly – will cope with what may result from this.
I see development along two tracks: 1) monetization and 2) social equity.
It’s been clear, starting with tennis in 1968 and, later, the Olympics in 1986, that amateurism
per se would eventually give way
entirely to professionalism. And what is professionalism but monetization? And as we’ve learned only too well over the last 40 years, whatever can be monetized
will be monetized.
The only questions have been – and this applies equally to Wall Street, medicine, education and tech – a) who runs the game as
concessionaire and b) who’s left schlepping the load?
As was the case in professional sports before free agency, the NCAA, its conferences and colleges now control college sports and, in effect, LET PLAYERS PLAY in return for free tuition, room and board. The players are now
challenging that.
And given what now looks like a “democratization” wrinkle in monetization – as evidenced in developments, such as the GAMESTOP shorting fandango – the players, if they stand strong, have serious leverage here. And
at the very least should garner a seat at the table.
And if most of Congress agrees with Senators Booker and Murphy, the players could wind up ECOMICALLY EMANCIPATED.
FULLY.
ND, as is the case with ALL other universities, has had ZERO PROBLEM with both the monetization and cartelization of higher education in general, in which students who've been saddled with debt are then sent out into a marketplace devoid of adequate opportunities.
So, what will ND's approach be here? Will it willingly concede part of its concessionary prerogative in the name of greater individual economic freedom, or would that threaten the whole structure that promotes ANYTHING BUT economic freedom for the average student?
Equally interesting is the question of how ND and/or other institutions will wish to frame economic emancipation for student athletes – should Congress require it.
Would ND support a system that favors superior athletes – who in many cases are more economically disadvantaged minorities – or one that "redistributes" the
proceeds?
In other words, equality of opportunity – with minorities in the usual role of whites; or equality of outcome, with whites in the usual role of minorities. For an institution espousing
social justice, that to me looks like CHINESE HANDCUFFS.
Not to mention that neither football nor anything-or-one else in ND-land is supposed to eclipse ND itself or the sanctity of the STUDENT FIRST concept. All of which begins to throw light on how fraught this all is and how the PERFECT could easily become the ENEMY OF THE GOOD either way.
What could happen, THEORETICALLY, is that ND and/or other universities decide they wish to continue doing things THE OLD FASHIONED way, while working out some modified deal with the NCAA that keeps them all in the driver’s seat. That is, assuming whatever law may get passed would allow that.
What will ND ACTUALLY DO? NO IDEA. But if it were me and I didn’t want this sort of change, I’d hire EVERY LAST LOBBIEST I COULD to pull EVERY LAST CONGRESSIONAL STRING WITHIN REACH.
And is that not a Jack Swarbrick type assignment? Or is that something finally ABOVE HIS PAY GRADE?
Sure looking forward to finding out!