Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** C’mon, Bill
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Cullerton, SDems concur *** Madigan defers consideration of CTU-backed bills until spring session
Posted in:
* On to the Senate…
Been an interesting floor debate so far on @RepChrisWelch's bill that'd allow college athletes to profit from endorsement deals. A range of concerns, including just now from Rep. Anthony DeLuca (D-Chicago Heights), who says it'll "put a dagger in the heart of amateur athletics"
— Hannah Meisel (@hannahmeisel) October 30, 2019
After nearly an hour, the bill that would allow college athletes to profit from endorsement deals passes with 86 votes, and moves to Senate where it should pass in second week of Veto Session. pic.twitter.com/WMZrftsSA9
— Hannah Meisel (@hannahmeisel) October 30, 2019
* On to the House…
Indoor vaping would be prohibited in public indoor areas, along with tobacco smoking, under legislation approved Tuesday by the Senate.
The Senate voted 41-11 to add e-cigarettes to the Smoke Free Illinois law that outlawed tobacco smoking in indoor public places. Senate Bill 1864 now moves to the House.
As currently written, the bill would even prohibit the use of vaping products inside a store that sells them. Sen. Dave Syverson, R-Rockford, noted the Smoke Free Illinois law allows smoking inside a tobacco store. Sen. Terry Link, D-Vernon Hills, said that he wanted the Senate to act on the bill Tuesday, but if the House later changed it to allow e-cigarettes to be used inside vape shops, he would support the change.
* Also heading to the House…
Illinois senators Tuesday approved legislation that would cap out-of-pocket payments for insulin for some diabetics.
The Senate approved Senate Bill 667 on a vote of 48-7. It must still be approved by the House.
The legislation caps out-of-pocket insulin payments at $100 for a 30-day supply. Sen. Andy Manar, D-Bunker Hill, said the idea came to him after a constituent called his office and said she and her family had to choose between making their house payment or paying for insulin for their diabetic daughters.
“That’s a position no one in the state of Illinois should be in,” Manar said.
* Going nowhere for now…
Meanwhile, a bill to ban the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products still hasn’t moved forward. The Senate Executive Committee took testimony on the pros and cons of the bill, but took no action on it.
The sticking point here is the proposed ban on menthol cigarettes.
…Adding… Dead…
Illinois state senators failed to override Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s veto of a measure that would have restricted the Illinois governor’s ability to unilaterally request waivers from the federal government for things like Medicaid.
Lawmakers are in Springfield for fall veto session to consider not just new legislation but also bills the governor vetoed. He didn’t veto many, but one would have put restrictions on the governor’s ability to ask the federal government for the ability to change how it administers certain programs.
State Sen. Sue Rezin’s bill, Senate Bill 2026, passed the Senate in April unanimously. It passed the House in May, 75-41. Gov. J.B. Pritzker vetoed it in July.
“While this legislation was well intended, unfortunately it does not afford the state enough flexibility to operate these programs,” Pritzker’s veto message said. “I do not anticipate any circumstances in which my administration would pursue waivers to limit Illinoisans’ access to federal programs or benefits. Nonetheless, it’s critical to retain our flexibility to innovate and be responsive to the evolving healthcare needs of the people of Illinois.”
The override vote was 27-23-1. It needed 36.
*** UPDATE *** Excerpt from Sen. Rezin’s press release…
“To say I am disappointed in the outcome of today’s vote would be an understatement,” said Sen. Rezin. “For far too long, those with pre-existing conditions have been on defense in a healthcare battle that has been playing out politically. Today, we had the chance to give those individuals the peace of mind they deserve, but instead, they will continue to worry about their healthcare coverage.” […]
“Why would we leave this decision up to the Second Floor, when we have the ability, today, to ensure that those with pre-existing conditions get the coverage they deserve and desperately need,” asked Sen. Rezin during her floor remarks. “Applying for these waivers could have a detrimental effect on people with pre-existing conditions, causing them to be denied coverage, be charged higher premiums, or worst-case scenario, lose access to health care services.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:47 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** C’mon, Bill
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Cullerton, SDems concur *** Madigan defers consideration of CTU-backed bills until spring session
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I think the NCAA, the governing body, issued a ruling on that.
So… yay?
I also, 100%, support the NCAA in their ruling yesterday.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:50 am
Interesting to see his veto upheld. I wonder if that’s going to be a pattern.
I’m also wondering if they’re going to have a ban on indoor pot smoking
Comment by Fav human Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:57 am
So if athletes get paid for their likeness, then when a college website puts pictures of normal students on their websites for promotional purposes shouldn’t they be paid for their likeness as well?
Comment by Question Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:57 am
===I wonder if that’s going to be a pattern===
I don’t believe there are any other override motions filed.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:58 am
=== then when a college website puts pictures of normal students===
Those in the pictures sign waivers.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 11:58 am
I think the bill to ban flavored tobacco and vape products is overkill. Of course, the fact that they do not agree on menthol is absolutely hilarious
Comment by Bothanspy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:00 pm
Is there anything in the athlete likenesses bill that is still relevant since the NCAA changed their rules? The goal of the bill seems to have been accomplished. Not like it hurts anything to put it in law, but it seems like an odd focus for the veto session at this point.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:24 pm
One can only hope that the e-cigarette and menthol cigarette flavor bans go nowhere. I wonder if they’ll add a fiscal note if they do go forward with it. Very pricey ban
Comment by Kane County Frank Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:24 pm
Colleges won’t be paying athletes for their likeness. Colleges won’t be paying the players at all, not even in the California law. Bob’s Used Auto Barn, on the other hand, will be able to pay a star QB $5000 or whatever to appear in a 30 second tv ad if they want. The star QB will be able to accept that money like any other student could if offered and still be eligible to play.
Comment by benniefly2 Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:24 pm
=Is there anything in the athlete likenesses bill that is still relevant since the NCAA changed their rules? The goal of the bill seems to have been accomplished. Not like it hurts anything to put it in law, but it seems like an odd focus for the veto session at this point.=
The NCAA said they were going to study the issue and have changes in it to allow it in the next 14 months. No harm in passing the legislation to add to the push to get the NCAA to change the rules and not delay if there is only one state with the issue.
Comment by OurMagician Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:27 pm
=== The goal of the bill seems to have been accomplished. Not like it hurts anything to put it in law, but it seems like an odd focus for the veto session at this point.===
It’s pandering. The NCAA, the governing body, addressed this.
“Yay, we passed a bill”?
It’s the coming *years* with the NCAA ruling, not these bills, we’ll see the real outcome to college athletics.
=== Bob’s Used Auto Barn, on the other hand, will be able to pay a star QB $5000 or whatever to appear in a 30 second tv ad if they want. The star QB will be able to accept that money like any other student could if offered and still be eligible to play.===
This is the correct answer.
“Meanwhile”, everyone congratulates themselves for this pander bill, the second string defensive tackle is still hungry, can’t visit family, or get winter clothes.
The more and more it’s talked about, this bill seems… frivolous… to the needs of actual student-athletes.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:29 pm
===The NCAA, the governing body, addressed this===
Addressed is the operative word. They didn’t actually do anything.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:30 pm
=== Addressed is the operative word. They didn’t actually do anything.===
The question of eligibility and working out that within the framework of the NCAA. The California legislation is preset to years before action too.
The 12th man off the bench in basketball who is limited to clothing, shoes, and food stipends must be wondering who thinks these things helps him/her
It’s a solution looking for a problem at this point?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:36 pm
Rich,
I guess i look at it this way;
The rights for likeness and sponsorship, the NCAA must, as the governing body, revist the thoughts as Nike and Under Armour, to name two easy examples, are subsidizing whole athletic departments. Those athletes deserve more than shoes or a sweatshirt. The NCAA needs to do right.
If legislation revolves around who makes what dollars, the real issue of what happens to athletes on campus is ignored.
They aren’t being fed, in so far food stipends.
They can’t get home, can’t even get a bus ticket.
They can’t get clothes as they are then required to wear logoed uniforms, but can’t receive needed items “above”
So, the next Heisman candidates get to hock cars, but the fifth year DB who is stuck eating “whenever” is… fine?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:43 pm
Happy that student athletes will be able to “earn” revenue from outside sources for their likeness. I imagine star athletes in college towns will see the most benefits of this and everyone else will be left out in the cold but it’s a step away from “keeping the kids broke bc amateurism” so I’m happy.
Happy for the indoor vaping ban. Mostly bc those people can be annoying lol.
Everything is pretty granular and I’d like to see how some of it fits into the bigger picture before I know how I’ll feel.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:46 pm
Senator Rezin, then narrow the scope of the bill to the exchange. The governor’s objections seem to be around Medicaid, and your purpose seems to be around insuring people with pre-existing conditions in the commercial marketplace affordably. It seems like there is room between the 2 positions, to me.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 12:47 pm
== Addressed is the operative word. They didn’t actually do anything.==
Supposedly by 2021 there will be a framework that preserves competitive balance after these new rules are enacted. Funny thing is, there has never been competitive balance in the NCAA so what the NCAA does in 2021 will be anyone’s guess. Good to have this on the books.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:00 pm
=== Good to have this on the books.===
Frivolous.
You think the NCAA is going to be able to walk back what they announced yesterday?
Hmm.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:02 pm
== Frivolous.
You think the NCAA is going to be able to walk back what they announced yesterday?
Hmm.==
Yes. Thank you for attending my ted talk.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:13 pm
=== Yes===
LOL
Wow. “There aughta be a law”…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:14 pm
@Oswego Willy - The kids don’t always sign waivers to have photo’s online. So isn’t it enough that NCAA players get over $100,000 in free tuition to schools like U of I? Maybe they better tax these spoiled kids on the free tuition if they plan to make money with their likeness. I have paid for 2 kids to attend college plus myself. These NCAA players are just entitled brats and have no idea that those of us who pay for college have to pay and also attend the same classes they do for free.
Comment by Question Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:18 pm
=== The kids don’t always sign waivers to have photo’s online.===
To be in the website, they do.
Further, in some instances schools add that “waiver” upon enrollment or by semester. It’s even done at the K-12 level.
=== So isn’t it enough that NCAA players get over $100,000 in free tuition to schools like U of I? Maybe they better tax these spoiled kids on the free tuition if they plan to make money with their likeness. I have paid for 2 kids to attend college plus myself.===
I’m not going to rehash my own words here of “yesterday”… literally, yesterday. Check it out.
=== These NCAA players are just entitled brats and have no idea that those of us who pay for college have to pay and also attend the same classes they do for free.===
Check my comments yesterday. Then come back with questions. Thanks.
Be well.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:22 pm
Capping insulation prices sounds like a nice little populist idea, but price controls rarely work. They ignore simple economic principles and create shortages or price inflation somewhere else in the system.
Comment by Double Dee Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:24 pm
DD, inflating the sales price of a drug over 1,000% compared to the costs for producing the drug is unjustifiable. Ergo, capping prices is now a legislative priority.
Comment by SpfdNewb Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:31 pm
== LOL
Wow. “There aughta be a law”…==
California has one and Florida is moving towards one (two massively important college athletics states), plus Congress is looking at stripping the NCAA of its tax free status if it doesn’t change its model. Sounds like some major players don’t trust the NCAA either.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:37 pm
OW- You may have addressed this yesterday but the press release from the NCAA specified that they were in favor of allowing NIL profitability for student athletes in a way that is consistent with the “collegiate model” which the ncaa has said is existentially tethered to athletes not being paid their fair market value. Moreover the NCAA has been more than disingenuous about the viability of paying athletes until California forced them to take these steps. If you trust that organization to be fair about this you haven’t been paying close enough attention.
Comment by Postgrad Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:39 pm
=== California has one and Florida is moving towards one===
I thought your TED talk was over? Huh
Yeah, now the NCAA, the governing body, will navigate with multiple state laws. That’ll make implementation easy. Sometimes over legislating hurts.
=== plus Congress is looking at stripping the NCAA of its tax free status if it doesn’t change its model.===
Which President is gonna sign that? Is there 60 votes in the Senate for cloture?
You get government oversight as a hammer, you get stubbed thumbs.
=== Sounds like some major players don’t trust the NCAA either.===
Yeah, they announced the plan yesterday.
Take a breath.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:41 pm
=== You may have addressed this yesterday but the press release from the NCAA specified that they were in favor of allowing NIL profitability for student athletes in a way that is consistent with the “collegiate model” which the ncaa has said is existentially tethered to athletes not being paid their fair market value.===
Addressed that yesterday.
They are Student-Athletes. Tethering to the student part is part and parcel.
Otherwise, the minors exists.
Being a D-1 athlete is not a right. It’s a privilege.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:44 pm
Y’all know they’re students too? Right?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:48 pm
I’d be more worried that the NCAA goes back to making Freshmen ineligible for varsity athletics, then making it mandatory… no red shirts, no “free” transfer, you transfer, you sit a year.
All possible too. All past policies.
Are we still forgetting they’re students?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:51 pm
=== Being a D-1 athlete is not a right. It’s a privilege ===
You can label them student-athletes all you want but it’s a smoke and mirror tag that perpetuates exploitation. It may be a privilege to you or me but for a number of these players it’s a BS token that is a fraction of what they’re true value is. A value that is redirected to universities and everyone but themselves. Gifted music students on scholarship can use their name to make money and sell their talents why not “student athletes” besides your arbitrary label?
Comment by Postgrad Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:54 pm
=== You can label them student-athletes all you want but it’s a smoke and mirror tag that perpetuates exploitation.===
Not one person is forcing anyone to play Division I athletics. If someone was being forced, that would be big news.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:57 pm
== Yeah, they announced the plan yesterday.
Take a breath.==
They didn’t announce a plan. They announced working groups to study the issue and then they will come up with a plan.
== I thought your TED talk was over? Huh
Yeah, now the NCAA, the governing body, will navigate with multiple state laws. That’ll make implementation easy. Sometimes over legislating hurts.==
It’s over. I’m just giving the people some extra content and I have no sympathy for the NCAA. They can spend some of the money they aren’t paying the players on some extra legal council to sort it out if they can’t keep up.
== Which President is gonna sign that? Is there 60 votes in the Senate for cloture?
You get government oversight as a hammer, you get stubbed thumbs.==
This is a bipartisan issue. The congressional bill is co sponsored by a R and a D. I think it’ll be fine.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:58 pm
=== Gifted music students on scholarship can use their name to make money and sell their talents why not “student athletes” besides your arbitrary label?===
What did the NCAA say yesterday.
Your concern for 0.02% of ALL college athletes is endearing.
The backup linebacker who went without a meal last night is pulling for you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 1:59 pm
There are polls showing that rules barring NCAA athletes from receiving revenue from NILs are unpopular in every demographic and very unpopular within the black community.
The NCAA Final Four is worth a billion dollar TV contract because it’s popular.
If the NCAA implements a policy that makes sense then the patchwork of state laws should be repealed.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:03 pm
=== If the NCAA implements a policy that makes sense then the patchwork of state laws should be repealed.===
The more states, the more headaches, the more silly pandering the more the solution will fail the student athletes.
Why this bill was so needed in Veto screams of a pandering.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:10 pm
To Oswego Willy: I’m not understanding the references of backups not being able to afford meals? After the UCONN basketball star in 2014 complained about being able to afford food, the NCAA passed a new rule that allows for schools to feed the athletes unlimited amounts of food now.
At the powerhouse schools I’m under the impression that high quality food is a recruiting tool, no division one player at a big school should be hungry
Comment by Seats Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:17 pm
=== This is a bipartisan issue. The congressional bill is co sponsored by a R and a D. I think it’ll be fine.===
So… you don’t have a President that will sign.
Bills are the laws until signature.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:18 pm
- Randomly Selected -
Not one time did you mention anything about education.
Your concern was about a payday for a select few, good luck with the rest.
How do I know?
===I have no sympathy for the NCAA. They can spend some of the money they aren’t paying the players on some extra legal council to sort it out if they can’t keep up.===
College athletics is a privilege, getting an education by using athletics is honorable.
Your TED talk seem to forget quite a bit.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:21 pm
Notice that the Evanston reps didn’t vote on the NCAA bill
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:25 pm
== So… you don’t have a President that will sign.
Bills are the laws until signature.==
Wooooooow. Deflect much??? Back to the point at hand. The NCAA didn’t announce anything yesterday that made me believe this bill was unnecessary. By the time 2021 comes around there will be plenty of state laws for the NCAA to choose from if their model isn’t sufficient.
== I’m not understanding the references of backups not being able to afford meals? After the UCONN basketball star in 2014 complained about being able to afford food, the NCAA passed a new rule that allows for schools to feed the athletes unlimited amounts of food now.==
I get the sense OW hasn’t followed this much from the sports angle. I get that feeling from his pro NCAA stances.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:25 pm
- Seats -
The point in the exercise is that the NCAA… they changed… and allowed… by meeting a *need* of a student.
Making money, paying athletes, if the point *isn’t* about being a student…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:30 pm
=== Wooooooow. Deflect much?===
Friend, you brought up Congress. You don’t like my answer, lol
=== Back to the point at hand.===
Narrator: you diverted the point.
=== I get the sense … hasn’t followed this much from the sports angle. I get that feeling from his pro NCAA stances.===
Not really, i think my point was to have someone call me on something, and in the end… it showed the NCAA stepped up.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:33 pm
Are we now going to argue the NCAA won’t offer unlimited food, and can’t be trusted, especially after the dining facilities across the power 5 universities are better than some five star restaurants?
That’s part of the exercise.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:37 pm
Let’s talk food;
=== Here’s a look at the universities which spent the most money on meals for college athletes in a recent study, according to Forbes.
1. University of Arkansas: $3.5 million
2. Ohio State University: $3.1 million
3. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor: $2.8 million
4. University of Iowa: $2.8 million
5. Texas A&M University, College Station: $2.7 million
6. University of Texas, Austin: $2.6 million
7. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities: $2.5 million
8. University of Kansas: $2.2 million
9. University of Tennessee, Knoxville: $1.9 million
10. University of Washington, Seattle: $1.9 million
11. University of Georgia: $1.7 million
12. University of Oklahoma, Norman: $1.7 million
13. University of Maryland, College Park: $1.7 million
14. Auburn University: $1.5 million
15. University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign: $1.5 million
16. Pennsylvania State University: $1.4 million
17. Virginia Tech: $1.4 million
18. University of Louisville: $1.4 million
19. University of Oregon: $1.3 million
20. Indiana University, Bloomington: $1.3 million
The study is based off of two years of NCAA financial reports of all public schools. The Top-20 schools paid over $40 million total just to to feed their student-athletes===
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:43 pm
== Friend, you brought up Congress. You don’t like my answer, lol==
I mentioned it as a bill in the works. You harped on it and tried to shift the conversation.
== Not really, i think my point was to have someone call me on something, and in the end… it showed the NCAA stepped up.==
You’re the only one saying the NCAA stepped up. Almost all the expert opinion on this is very skeptical as to what will actually come of the NCAAs announcement of more working groups.
== Not one time did you mention anything about education.
Your concern was about a payday for a select few, good luck with the rest.==
You’re totally right. This isn’t about education. This is about players being Properly compensated for the value of their likeness. Some will get more than others obviously.
I think it’s really telling that it’s not about education when more bowl games get added or the tournament gets expanded for more teams and means more players miss class. It’s only about education when it’s time to get the players some more compensation for their image rights.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:45 pm
OW - There are a ton of false choices and assumptions wrapped into your argument. You can be proud of being a student athlete and also make the money that comes directly from your value. You can be a backup and still have monetary value. You don’t know their value and blocking them from exploring that does nothing for the poor people you talk about. You can get an education and still get paid money that otherwise enriches an organization. Stone walling state by state laws and pushing the goal posts lets a corrupt organization continue to exploit people because they will not be fair if left to their own devices. They show it time and time again
Comment by Go Cats Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:48 pm
=== This isn’t about education. This is about players being Properly compensated for the value of their likeness. Some will get more than others obviously.===
Then go play minor league sports. The NCAA has rules. It’s a privilege. You don’t want it to be about education speaks to how you have no want for education, that’s horrible. Maybe College isn’t the the place you think it is.
=== I think it’s really telling that it’s not about education when more bowl games get added or the tournament gets expanded for more teams and means more players miss class. It’s only about education when it’s time to get the players some more compensation for their image rights.===
I applauded the NCAA on that.
You’re just seemingly angry to be angry? It’s like you didn’t read anything i wrote, you can care less about education, you want it about dollars, and when I applaud the NCAA for doing right, you ignore it?
Whew.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:50 pm
=== You’re totally right. This isn’t about education===
The rest is frivolous like the bill
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:51 pm
=== You don’t know their value and blocking them from exploring that does nothing for the poor people you talk about===
Car dealership in Norman Oklahoma;
Jalen Hurts or your untapped value interior lineman.
Same? How much less will… Jalen be?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:57 pm
=== Stone walling state by state laws and pushing the goal posts lets a corrupt organization continue to exploit people because they will not be fair if left to their own devices.===
… and yet, the food situation… you think the NCAA is taking unlimited food away?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 2:58 pm
== Then go play minor league sports. The NCAA has rules. It’s a privilege. You don’t want it to be about education speaks to how you have no want for education, that’s horrible. Maybe College is the the place you think it is.==
Sounds like college isn’t the place you think it is for student athletes.
== I applauded the NCAA on that.
You’re just seemingly angry to be angry? It’s like you did t read anything i wrote, you can Cate less about education, you want it about dollars, and when I applaud the NCAA for doing right, you ignore it?
Whew.==
So you applaud the NCAA for taking players away from their regular academic schedules to make money for the NCAA, but when the players want a piece of the money it’s about education for them. Very consistent.
Once again this is a good bill. I think the more OW talks about the NCAA the more it becomes obvious that the ILGA is doing the right thing.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:01 pm
=== think the more …talks about the NCAA the more it becomes obvious that the ILGA is doing the right thing.===
LOL…
I’ll leave it up to the NCAA. They responded yesterday. Pandering is still pandering.
The de-valuing of a college education… wow.
That’s really the lesson here.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:14 pm
OW- Lineman from Oklahoma may not get the dame but that’s not the point. He can get whatever keeps him from going hungry. He can give lessons or find a niche, or get creative. You can wave food around etc but the NCAA profits disproportionately and is obviously interested in keeping that the case
Comment by Go Cats Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:14 pm
=== He can get whatever keeps him from going hungry.===
Narrator: they have unlimited food.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:22 pm
===but the NCAA profits disproportionately and is obviously interested in keeping that the case===
How does a non-profit profit? Who are the shareholders? How does the NCAA divide up the profits? Explain please. I’m very curious.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:23 pm
== LOL…
I’ll leave it up to the NCAA. They responded yesterday. Pandering is still pandering.
The de-valuing of a college education… wow.
That’s really the lesson here.==
For everyone reading. Notice how OW went from the NCAA presented a plan yesterday to how he’s fine with how they responded and he will leave it up to whatever plan they come up with in the future. It will forever be smoke and mirrors by the NCAA and their supporters when it comes to giving players the ability to profit off their likeness.
Members of the ILGA saw something in the news that they thought needed fixing in Illinois and they did. Good for them and for all the athletes that will have an opportunity to profit off their likeness now regardless of how the NCAA drags this along.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:30 pm
=== Notice how OW went from the NCAA presented a plan yesterday to how he’s fine with how they responded and he will leave it up to whatever plan they come up with in the future===
The NCAA is the governing body.
Is that too difficult to grasp?
Pandering is still pandering.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:41 pm
== How does a non-profit profit? Who are the shareholders? How does the NCAA divide up the profits? Explain please. I’m very curious.==
Most of the revenues goes back to the schools to fund the athletic industrial complex. Just at UIUC alone you have to pay Lovie Smith 21m over 6 years, gotta pay his assistants, gotta pay the basketball coach a couple million, his assistants, gotta build the state of the art athletic facilities for new recruits, etc.
All of this for “amateur” sports
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:43 pm
47 - Member schools, individuals operating within the system I.e football coaches. Do some research, your ignorance on the subject isn’t a strength.
OW - using your terms in previous comments. Point is there is potential value for ALL athletes
Comment by Postgrad Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:43 pm
You’re worried about people reading me, friend, you don’t value a college education.
Good luck.
:)
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:44 pm
===Do some research, your ignorance on the subject isn’t a strength.===
Lol. Explain to me some more about how the NCAA divides up its profits. How does that work exactly? If they are returning money to member schools, why do they keep charging those same schools annual dues to belong?
Also, I’ve been looking over their 990s, and I can’t seem to find out where all of the coaches are that you mention.
If you think the NCAA is paying football coaches salaries, you’d be wise not to call anyone else ignorant.
But whatever. I wish I was smart enough to read publicly available information. What could they possibly be spending all of that money on?
I guess I’ll never learn who their secret owners are. The mystery continues.
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/440567264
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:55 pm
===your ignorance on the subject===
LOL
I happen to know who 47th Ward is. Trust me, pal, you’re the ignorant one on any higher education topic.
It’s like those idiotic mansplaining tweets to David Simon about The Wire.
Go take a nap.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 3:57 pm
== Also, I’ve been looking over their 990s, and I can’t seem to find out where all of the coaches are that you mention.
If you think the NCAA is paying football coaches salaries, you’d be wise not to call anyone else ignorant.==
I didn’t call anyone ignorant but as I said before the money gets passed to individual schools and that’s what they spend the money on. It would be line 14 of any 990 on your link.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:04 pm
==It would be line 14 of any 990 on your link.==
Line 13. I’m sorry
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:08 pm
Never said the NCAA is paying coaches. There’s value and demand that is reflected in coaches salaries and the benefit of individuals who oversee the system and keep players from being paid.
Comment by Postgrad Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:09 pm
=== using your terms in previous comments. Point is there is potential value for ALL athletes===
“Some more valuable than others”
Some won’t have value as like Jalen Hurts in Norman OK…
The NCAA got it right yesterday. Now they need to follow thru… like unlimited food….
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:18 pm
===the money gets passed to individual schools and that’s what they spend the money on===
Spend a little time perusing Schedule I. Most of the payments to schools are for scholarships and grants related to athletics. Conferences get bigger payments, the Big 10 got $58M for example. For context, the total athletics budget for The Ohio State University is nearly $110M.
The NCAA pays for 90 championships across 3 divisions for more than 50,000 athletes every year. It also provides scholarships, insurance, and other services to athletes. Its Men’s Basketball tournament generates the lion’s share of its revenue via television rights. That revenue pays for championships in the other 89 sports that it sponsors.
To the extent that the NCAA payments to member schools subsidize those schools’ athletics departments, that’s a fair point. But anyone who think that amounts to “profit” or that is the sole source of money in college athletics is way off base.
And many of the top coaches are paid by “boosters” who donate to their alma mater for that specific purpose.
There is plenty for which to criticize college athletics in general, and the NCAA’s role in particular, but this line of argument is not one of them.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:33 pm
47 - Were simply arguing that athletes get their free market value decided from outside funds, literally putting name image and likeness in the hands of the individual athlete. I think the NCAA has deserved skepticism because they control NIL and have made bad faith arguments the past months and only moved when they were absolutely forced when they could’ve taken steps for a decade. Boosters pay coach salaries to see a successful program they have an equal demand for players because they can and have paid them.
Comment by postgrad Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 4:59 pm
== Spend a little time perusing Schedule I. Most of the payments to schools are for scholarships and grants related to athletics. Conferences get bigger payments, the Big 10 got $58M for example. For context, the total athletics budget for The Ohio State University is nearly $110M.
The NCAA pays for 90 championships across 3 divisions for more than 50,000 athletes every year. It also provides scholarships, insurance, and other services to athletes. Its Men’s Basketball tournament generates the lion’s share of its revenue via television rights. That revenue pays for championships in the other 89 sports that it sponsors.
To the extent that the NCAA payments to member schools subsidize those schools’ athletics departments, that’s a fair point. But anyone who think that amounts to “profit” or that is the sole source of money in college athletics is way off base.
And many of the top coaches are paid by “boosters” who donate to their alma mater for that specific purpose.
There is plenty for which to criticize college athletics in general, and the NCAA’s role in particular, but this line of argument is not one of them.==
Yes. Schedule I outlines the disbursements of scholarships and grants that goes to schools. Of course that’s not the schools only source of athletic revenue but the point is a more proportional dispersement is what players are after. Ohio state got 22k for scholarships and has two top 25 revenue generating programs for the NCAA.
The knock on effect is what’s important not the dollar figures. More proportional dispersement of resources means less booster money, apparel money, etc swamping around because there’s less need to do all these other things to try and get players in the programs.
Comment by Randomly Selected Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 5:37 pm
The NCAA has done a lousy job of self governance. The courts have taken notice of it and legislators have now done the same. Its good that they quickly realized they were on the wrong side of the likeness argument. Maybe this is pandering but it did force the NCAA to address the issue. Hope they now follow through. Better yet, I would hope they could begin to evolve on their own.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Oct 30, 19 @ 7:50 pm