California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Comments or Suggestions
WPhan
Posts: 91
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:50 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: College Water Polo fan

California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby WPhan » Wed Apr 27, 2022 7:28 pm

I know this is a water polo board but something is emerging on the college athletics radar that would have impact on athletes and specific sports. It's SB 1401 that could potentially transform the economic model for California's Pac-12 and Mountain West schools.

Here's a recap from the San Jose Mercury with the link behind a pay wall https://www.mercurynews.com/2022/04/27/think-nil-changed-college-sports-new-california-senate-bill-would-transform-economic-model-for-pac-12-mountain-west-schools/

Think NIL changed college sports? New California senate bill would transform economic model for Pac-12, Mountain West schools
As law, it would create a revenue-sharing arrangement between athletic departments at California universities and the athletes in their money-making sports.Football and men’s basketball players, in particular, would receive tens of thousands of dollars — if not hundreds of thousands — directly from athletic department coffers via what the bill calls “degree completion funds.” If SB-1401 becomes law, which seemingly could happen as soon as 2023, the requirements could place the California schools in the Pac-12 and Mountain West conferences at a significant financial disadvantage, create massive Title IX complications and threaten the long-term viability of Olympic sports, from softball to swimming to tennis.

Coincidentally, the NCAA is moving quickly to come up with an alternative rather than being a "deer in the headlights" when the first NIL and "athlete pay for play" proposals came up several years ago. Here's a link to a Sports Illustrated article https://www.si.com/college/2022/04/27/ncaa-new-transformation-committee-changes. With a recap "Several athletic administrators and college sports insiders discussed the Transfer Committee’s concepts under the condition of anonymity. They include (1) eliminating scholarship caps on sports that offer only partial scholarships; (2) abolishing the limitation on the number of coaches per team; (3) expanding direct payments from schools to athletes; (4) reconfiguring the recruiting calendar; and (5) implementing closed periods in the NCAA transfer portal. At least the first three items will be left in the decision-making hands of individual conferences, if the concepts are approved. "

Supposedly Stanford and USC are opposed to this proposal with the University of California and Cal State schools not taking a position. My impression that the fundamental premise is to have revenue sharing you need revenue generation. Most schools without big-time football or basketball programs would be at big disadvantage because most of those programs with Olympic sports involvement are "cost centers" not "revenue generators". To me this is the law of unintended consequences starting with "fairness" to pay athletes but ending up with massive "dark money" in NIL deals. This SB-1401 should keep things lively for a while!

OCPoloDad
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:05 am

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby OCPoloDad » Tue May 03, 2022 10:01 am

Hmmm if I got this right, you mean I get to sign a NIL deal for $$$$$, then I get tuition, books, food, and housing for free, I can never be cut from the Team, AND I get $25K a year for participation plus a graduation bonus of $$$,$$$............sign me up. Everyone knows how financially prudent I can be as a 18-23 year old male. And yes, my monies will be given to my family.............uh-huh.

This from Sportico: The head-count sports that would currently qualify for revenue-sharing under the statute’s provisions are football, men’s basketball and women’s basketball. Based on 2018 financial figures schools provided to the U.S. Department of Education, the legislation would have worked out to FBS football players in California earning, on average, $132,000 per year in addition to the price of their grant-in-aid, while men’s basketball players would receive an extra $107,000 and women’s basketball players would get $15,000 more annually.

However, a legislative staffer for Bradford told Sportico that, ahead of Wednesday’s committee vote, some key components of the bill have already been changed or eliminated through amendments the legislator was inclined to support. Items thus far on the cutting room floor include a gender-equity provision that would have directly punished schools’ athletic directors with three-year suspensions if their department failed to be Title IX compliant by 2026.


Yes, complete equity in payouts based on the above :lol: This might not be Title IX compliant ("cutting room floor"), and you woman basketball players will only get 14% of what your male counterparts will get. Water polo, Swimming, Lacrosse, Soccer; sorry, you know we carry you.

Only in California!

OCPoloDad
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:05 am

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby OCPoloDad » Wed May 18, 2022 11:55 am

Recent update on this and we will find out within the next 2 days if this becomes reality: https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb ... 41dab17351

This, undoubtedly, is the path that the state's universities are trying to push their lawmakers down, as a straight 50 percent split could have apocalyptic consequences on the Olympic sports at USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford -- a pride point on each of those four campuses. Those representing the interests of football and basketball players have argued that it is not, and never should have been, their job to fund the water polo team's budget.

Jon Wilner (San Jose Mercury News) wrote that Cal, Stanford and "possibly" UCLA would give serious thought to dropping out of FBS if SB-1401 passes in its current form, so there's one side of it. On the other side, future recruits could be so impressed by the opportunity to leave college with hundreds of thousands of dollars in the bank (so long as they graduate) that the balance of power in college football shifts West, forcing other states to respond.

In my opinion, college sports is turning into a circus when one considers the side shows of things like this, NIL, and the joke that is the transfer portal.

NoSoloPolo
Posts: 39
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2019 3:05 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Fan

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby NoSoloPolo » Thu May 19, 2022 4:40 pm

I happened to read the actual bill.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/face ... 0220SB1401

As it is written, the graduation fund seems to be maxed out at $25k per year per athlete (67471.b)
While not chump change, and it represents a significant departure for college athletics, we are not talking about distributing 50% of the sport's revenue to the players (it doesn't seem to me).

So...for example...the UCLA football roster is 125 athletes. If every athlete qualified for the graduation fund and received it, this bill would cost UCLA football roughly $12.5M for those 125 athletes (or $3.1M per year). I don't know what the budget or revenue is for UCLA football but I do know Chip Kelly's salary is $4.8M per year.

Bottom line is the NCAA should have setup a graduation fund concept before this whole NIL mess started...but instead the NIL was thrust on them through the courts...and now this. This is what happens when arrogance is amplified by ignorance. Buffooons.

Sctrojanje
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:36 am
How are you connected to water polo?: Family and fan. Daughter plays, I played and wife coached and played

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby Sctrojanje » Thu May 19, 2022 6:37 pm

Per Steve Berkowitz of USA Today, this bill has died in committee as of 12:01 pm this afternoon.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByBerkowitz/status/1527363714873077779

OCPoloDad
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:05 am

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby OCPoloDad » Thu May 19, 2022 11:13 pm

Sctrojanje wrote:Per Steve Berkowitz of USA Today, this bill has died in committee as of 12:01 pm this afternoon.
https://mobile.twitter.com/ByBerkowitz/status/1527363714873077779


Thank you Sc for the update. It was very poorly written.

Sctrojanje
Posts: 133
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2019 1:36 am
How are you connected to water polo?: Family and fan. Daughter plays, I played and wife coached and played

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby Sctrojanje » Fri May 20, 2022 12:46 pm

As of 19 May 2022, SB1401 was placed in the Suspense File and labeled "Hold in Committee"....or as my legislative friends refer to as the burn pit where bad ideas are placed, and allows legislators to avoid voting on a bad bill and it disappears from public eyes.

Rational
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:14 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Fan

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby Rational » Fri May 20, 2022 1:33 pm

OCPoloDad wrote:... and the joke that is the transfer portal.


Why is the transfer portal a joke? Especially when you consider what the old process was (lose a year, coach could prohibit which schools you could attend) it seems like a vast improvement.

OCPoloDad
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:05 am

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby OCPoloDad » Fri May 20, 2022 3:44 pm

Rational wrote:
OCPoloDad wrote:... and the joke that is the transfer portal.


Why is the transfer portal a joke? Especially when you consider what the old process was (lose a year, coach could prohibit which schools you could attend) it seems like a vast improvement.


I am of the opinion it has some benefits, but drawbacks. The rich get richer (we have a recent one on the women’s side that has been posted elsewhere?); less high school recruits when one can pull known talent out of the portal; starts a dysfunctional pattern of bringing in players who might replace other current starters and a program that soon gains a reputation; There are many athletes who enter the portal only to find out no one else wants them, left in limbo, and a possible withdrawal all together from college. Obviously, most all of this revolves around football, basketball. Yes, there are some definite benefits as well. It’s not that simple yet it’s by far much more fluid and easier now. I am sure I have missed some pros and cons so this is all a matter of one’s opinion

Rational
Posts: 226
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:14 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Fan

Re: California SB 1401 - The Next Step for College Athletics Pay for Play

Postby Rational » Fri May 20, 2022 5:50 pm

Yes, the rich get richer, but you can't force someone to want something. If they can be a stud at San Jose but instead choose to be a back-up at U$C, that's their choice to make. The grass is always greener because its fertilized with bu11$h1+.

A greater problem is that many HS and club coaches don't seek out adequate competition, so kids have an over-inflated sense of their talents. Then the coach pushes them to go to the highest ranked school they can, despite the fit for the kid. The result is a school like Indiana gets kids pushed to them that belong at Augustana instead. UCLA gets kids that never touch the water that would actually play and contribute at UC Irvine.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest