Unanimous Supreme Court Ruling on Student Athletes Pay

[MCMLXXX]

In N.C.A.A. Case, Supreme Court Backs Payments to Student-Athletes (msn.com)

[ttunt1970]

People should be wary of what you want as I can see a ruling one these days to show scholarships, cost of attendance and any compensation will be considered ordinary income and subject to income tax. This could be a Gagne changer as well as forgiving student loans ect

[MeanGreenTexan]

9 minutes ago, ttunt1970 said:

People should be wary of what you want as I can see a ruling one these days to show scholarships, cost of attendance and any compensation will be considered ordinary income and subject to income tax. This could be a Gagne changer as well as forgiving student loans ect

If a music student received a scholarship because they were an elite jazz drummer, but they had side gigs over the weekends that paid well, should that musician have to pay taxes on their scholarship?
If a photography student received a scholarship for their talents, but sold some of their pictures on the side, should that student have to pay taxes on their scholarship?

This is no different.

[ttunt1970]

But it’s like bureaucrats will eventually say all monetary gain ie., scholarships of any kind should subject to ordinary in some and force under- the-table payments again throughout society(private school from elementary through college) look out what you ask for

[meanrob]

4 minutes ago, ttunt1970 said:

But it’s like bureaucrats will eventually say all monetary gain ie., scholarships of any kind should subject to ordinary in some and force under- the-table payments again throughout society(private school from elementary through college) look out what you ask for

Yeah, I’d hate to win the lottery, I mean all those taxes I’d have to pay. 

[keith]

Money on the side is money on the side and should be considered income for tax purposes.  If we are going to go down the student-athlete is really an employee of the University route, then instead of providing the student-athlete a "scholarship" provide them a wage/salary (also taxable income) and then let the student-athlete pay for their tuition, housing, books, fees, meal plans and anything else necessary to remain a student in good standing at the University out of their earnings.

[MeanGreenTeeth]

sounds like we're headed to a situation where the 30-40 schools that can afford to pay their athletes significant money form their own league. 

[Tom McKrackin]

Sucks for us but the SCOTUS git this right.  It was Absurd that a coach like Seth could be paid millions but the players not a dime yet could be paralyzed from injuries.  Just absurd.  My hope is that this will force the NCAA to become more of an HOA and less of a multi billion dollar business claiming to be for “Amatuer sportsmanship”

[meanrob]

25 minutes ago, keith said:

Money on the side is money on the side and should be considered income for tax purposes.  If we are going to go down the student-athlete is really an employee of the University route, then instead of providing the student-athlete a "scholarship" provide them a wage/salary (also taxable income) and then let the student-athlete pay for their tuition, housing, books, fees, meal plans and anything else necessary to remain a student in good standing at the University out of their earnings.

If he/she is an employee of the university then why the hell do they have to go to school? 
 

Why would anyone go to a school who said “Ok, we’ll pay you 15k a year but you’ll have to pay for everything.”  
 

The band student scholarship example above is right on. Why is it different because you can catch a ball? 
 

It’s going to change and rightfully so and as an institution you either prepare and be ready for it or get left behind. 

[MeanGreenTexan]

33 minutes ago, keith said:

Money on the side is money on the side and should be considered income for tax purposes.  If we are going to go down the student-athlete is really an employee of the University route, then instead of providing the student-athlete a "scholarship" provide them a wage/salary (also taxable income) and then let the student-athlete pay for their tuition, housing, books, fees, meal plans and anything else necessary to remain a student in good standing at the University out of their earnings.

Yes, money on the side... sure!    If the drummer makes money on his gigs, he should report it (haha, doubtful).

Same with a student athlete's likeness being used, or an autograph session, or whatever else they hustle on the side to earn money.  That money should be taxable... but has no bearing on a scholarship and should not make the scholarship taxable.

[keith]

9 minutes ago, meanrob said:

If he/she is an employee of the university then why the hell do they have to go to school? 
 

Why would anyone go to a school who said “Ok, we’ll pay you 15k a year but you’ll have to pay for everything.”  
 

The band student scholarship example above is right on. Why is it different because you can catch a ball? 
 

It’s going to change and rightfully so and as an institution you either prepare and be ready for it or get left behind. 

That's the beauty of it meanrob, they don't have to go to school.  It's entirely their choice.  They are free to do whatever they want.   Perhaps it's simply part of the requirements of employment, but if they don't want to do it, they don't have to.  No one is forcing them.  

[Tom McKrackin]

“Everyone agrees that the NCAA can require student athletes to be enrolled students in good standing. But the NCAA’s business model of using unpaid student athletes to generate billions of dollars in revenue for the colleges raises serious questions under the antitrust laws,” Kavanaugh wrote

[meanrob]

36 minutes ago, keith said:

That's the beauty of it meanrob, they don't have to go to school.  It's entirely their choice.  They are free to do whatever they want.   Perhaps it's simply part of the requirements of employment, but if they don't want to do it, they don't have to.  No one is forcing them.  

Fine, have UNT take the hard line. Might as well drop athletics because no one will come here. Basically you’d be a company paying eight bucks an hour while everyone around you pays fifteen. Or twenty. 
 

And until the NFL lets in high school graduates or comes up with a different option they pretty much do have to go to school. 
 

We can curmudgeon all we want. This is happening. Either get ahead of it or get left behind. Darrell Royal didn’t like throwing the ball, try that today and see how it works out. 

Edited June 21, 2021 by meanrob

[keith]

I'm not sure what hardline UNT (or any university would be taking).   "Pay" them the value of the full ride and they pay for the cost of their education.  That part is a wash and would probably be a valuable and eye-opening experience for them.  Then allow them to earn whatever else they can on top of that (on the field, off the field, it doesn't matter).  I'm not sure how that part works though.  Does everyone on the team earn (get paid) the same amount?  Is it a graduated scale where starters earn more?  Do some positional players or "stars" of the team get paid significantly more than others?  Is what they earn public information?  Who gets to decide all this stuff?

Edited June 21, 2021 by keith

[meanrob]

6 minutes ago, keith said:

I'm not sure what hardline UNT (or any university would be taking).   "Pay" them the value of the full ride and they pay for the cost of their education.  That part is a wash and would probably be a valuable and eye-opening experience for them.  Then allow them to earn whatever else they can on top of that (on the field, off the field, it doesn't matter).  I'm not sure how that part works though.  Does everyone on the team earn (get paid) the same amount?  Is it a graduated scale where starters earn more?  Do some positional players or "stars" of the team get paid significantly more that others?  Is what they earn public information?  Who gets to decide all this stuff?

I’m saying if UNT does what you’re suggesting and UTSA offers scholarships and the athletes make off field money, guess where they are going? 
 

To me this is close to when it divided between I-A and I-AA and we made the wrong decision. Do what it takes to make the right decision this time. 
 

All your other questions are valid and I don’t think anyone knows. I could care less about the NCAA but they’re probably right when they say a patchwork of different laws in different states is not the answer. 

[greenjoe]

Does a starter get paid as much as a RS freshman ?  And I know this is an NCAA case, but why doesn't it extend down into high school as well ?  

[untjim1995]

Maybe this has something to do with why the Power Leagues are open to letting a G5 school make the playoffs? Did the powers at be see this coming and decide to go ahead and act like there’s something equitable for all schools now, so as to keep any lawsuit at bay, knowing full well that paying players will pretty much crush those teams without any decent media deal? 

The playoff expansion has made no sense to me, as it opens a door to schools from G5 conferences that the P5s and their media partners loathe. In case you think otherwise, remember those G5 darlings got Heisman’d by the Big XII and their media partners by getting told that they aren’t wanted, to the point that they paid the Big XII members MORE to not take any of them. 
 

This new law is a true game changer…in that programs with the big media deals will literally buy talent that is both in HS and in college. They are about 40 schools that will like this—and about 90 who won’t. Guess where we land in that 90?

[El Paso Eagle]

4 hours ago, MeanGreenTeeth said:

sounds like we're headed to a situation where the 30-40 schools that can afford to pay their athletes significant money form their own league. 

So your saying the Pony Excess is back?

[El Paso Eagle]

So a couple of questions ...

I am guessing the women's teams will have to be paid on the same level as the mens regardless of income?

How long until someone sue for the right to pay HG players (were already seeing a player sit out his Senior year)?

[El Paso Eagle]

18 minutes ago, untjim1995 said:

Maybe this has something to do with why the Power Leagues are open to letting a G5 school make the playoffs? Did the powers at be see this coming and decide to go ahead and act like there’s something equitable for all schools now, so as to keep any lawsuit at bay, knowing full well that paying players will pretty much crush those teams without any decent media deal? 

The playoff expansion has made no sense to me, as it opens a door to schools from G5 conferences that the P5s and their media partners loathe. In case you think otherwise, remember those G5 darlings got Heisman’d by the Big XII and their media partners by getting told that they aren’t wanted, to the point that they paid the Big XII members MORE to not take any of them. 
 

This new law is a true game changer…in that programs with the big media deals will literally buy talent that is both in HS and in college. They are about 40 schools that will like this—and about 90 who won’t. Guess where we land in that 90?

They are OK because they don't plan on being a part of the NCAA for much longer. This has opened the door for "professional" college sports. A group of schools with really deep pockets will at sometime in the near future form their own league. 

[NorthTexasSportsNetwork]

If we can start winning, we won’t have much of a problem with this rule.

 

[El Paso Eagle]

1 hour ago, NorthTexasSportsNetwork said:

If we can start winning, we won’t have much of a problem with this rule.

 

Hope your right. Hate to say it, but I think the rich will get richer. This will lead to buying players. Hopefully we can find alums who are willing to help. 

[NorthTexasWeLove]

10 hours ago, MeanGreenTexan said:

If a music student received a scholarship because they were an elite jazz drummer, but they had side gigs over the weekends that paid well, should that musician have to pay taxes on their scholarship?
If a photography student received a scholarship for their talents, but sold some of their pictures on the side, should that student have to pay taxes on their scholarship?

This is no different.

It shouldn't be any different, but it is and it will be. Boosters will get involved with this to land "prized recruits". Expect significant sizes of money for a singular autograph and per the rule, "it's not cheating." But, it is. So, in a way, It's very different because your hypothetical drummer and photographer isn't taking money to come practice those talents. They are earning side money from an entirely different entity that is not affiliated with the university. 

[GrandGreen]

I think it is a very poor decision that has the potential to ruin college sports below the elite level.

They had two basic choses, individual rights versus encouraging athletic competition.  

The point, they seem to always disregard is that few college teams make enough money to even break even with the current level of expenditures.   Most school lose millions of dollars on athletics if you don't count the mandated student fees that keep most programs solvent. 

 

[meangreen11]

I think it will mainly change things for the very elite college football and basketball players.  Those are the only two sports that make money.  Right now there are age restrictions that incentivize/force super athletes to stay in college for a period of time before they move up to the professional leagues.  I look for these to be immediately removed.  So you won't see a Tony Mitchell be a one and done he would just go directly to the league.  Secondly, I think that you will see more of the secondary sports like track softball etc dropped at a lot of schools because more of the pie will go to the major revenue athletes that can generate $.  This is going to change things no doubt but the silver lining is that removing the money from the NCAA will revert things back to more of an amatuer type of league like it was before.