PDXHusker

On 4/18/2024 at 2:44 PM, DGNU said:

Had some injury issues I know but terribly under-utilized at Wisco this year- would be a great fit. Portal is completely insane- over the last hour 2 guys from smaller conferences joined SEC teams to fall into obscurity... I like Fred's approach. I don't think he's bringing in guys just to add bodies to the bench. They fit the system/they play.

As long as the talent is there, sure.

Kyle taking a visit to Iowa State after the dead period

1 hour ago, Kayvan said:

Does this one move the needle? I’m asking because I really don’t have an opinion. 

Seems like a depth piece at most. Minnesota was after him also.

Every team is dealing with developmental kids leaving in the portal. With something changing, I think you’ll see this continue with mid majors acting as developmental programs with players moving up and down. 

16 minutes ago, Hayseed said:

ALERT!!!!!

Sounds like Alabama lock, but who knows.

16 minutes ago, Hayseed said:

ALERT!!!!!

Sounds like Alabama lock, but who knows.

3 hours ago, huskerfan74 said:

The only good news I heard today is the rumor that Frost might be Iowa’s offensive coordinator. That is one game we are sure to win next year if that happens.

The several day old one or a new one?

49 minutes ago, BIG8forever said:

I dont think you understand where this whole conference realignment is heading, these giant conferences I believe will leave the NCAA

What does that have to do with conference officials trying to influence transferring, or in Raiolas case, high school kids? You think they have more clout than the SEC conference officials and are dirtier somehow? Good luck!

2 hours ago, BIG8forever said:

It is in the Big 10s interest that nebraska become a power again, do the conferences have any input into the transfer portal and can they coax an outcome with nil partnerships?

Oh yeah, the conference commissioner is calling recruits on our behalf. He told Ohio State to eat out and McCord was ours. 

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

And I’m saying, if we are going to do this, let’s regulate it and put in a structure. You’re saying the highly regulated side is. The one you’re fine getting less money 

And I said go for it, see if the government really cares about college athletics versus medicine. Given they haven’t really yet, I’ll stick with your analogy not applying.

8 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

What?  

Which part do you not understand? Becoming a doctor is highly regulated. Becoming a college football player is not. It’s not a good analogy.

2 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

My son in law is a resident in ear nose and throat surgery.  He makes around $70,000 per year and works over 90 hours per week.  An actual ENT surgeon makes around $350,000 per year.  The Hospital isn't billing less because of that.

 

Pardon me if I don't feel sorry for players in college that aren't getting paid what a professional is making in the NFL.  An college player isn't the same as an NFL player.  If that were the case, college football would look just as well played as an NFL game....and...it's not.

 

The ENT surgeon in residency, isn't the same as one with years of experience either.  That's why they get paid less....to learn their craft and have a chance to get out and make more.

 

So, again, what is the market for a college football player?

That analogy only works if the regulatory conditions are the same, which they clearly are not. You can certainly advocate with your congresspeople for that, but that’s not the situation today. 

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

What's the market?

What people are willing to pay for a player to play for their team/college.

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I disagree.

The market dictates they are, doesn’t it? 

7 minutes ago, Dr. Strangelove said:

I see that, but I think that unless the payments are raised significantly, football players are still underpaid? The amount they can make under this proposal is still limited by Title IX considerations. Until schools find a way around Title IX, which I think is only possible if football is privatized, the amount players can make is still much less than their fair market value.

 

I do think that this proposal is a good start and schools are going to jump onto it as a solution - they don't want to share 50% of their revenue with players - but eventually the Supreme Court is going to rule that players are employees. And once they do the players will unionize. 

The schools can do their own nil as well, for this reason.

The $30,000 doesn’t include the nil money, which would still exist and be directly operated by the schools, and is a minimum. There is no cap on either the trust fund or nil.

Quote

Members of the new subdivision will be permitted to strike name, image and likeness (NIL) deals with their own athletes — a significant move away from the current NIL structure.

Quote

However, the most impactful benefit of this new model is a framework in which schools can directly compensate athletes through a trust fund. Schools within the new subdivision will be required to distribute to athletes thousands of dollars in additional educationally related funds without limitation.

There is no cap on the amount of funds that a program can provide an athlete.