Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do these politicians not see the far-reaching effects of these laws? Teams that are on TV more often and are in magazines will benefit, while smaller schools will be further damaged. Just a terrible idea.https://www.foxnews.com/sports/ncaa-paid-players-california-bill-law
If this spreads to the rest of the country I think Nebraska benefits tremendously! Texas and Texas A&M would probably clean house.
yea, nothing like what happens today.Do these politicians not see the far-reaching effects of these laws? Teams that are on TV more often and are in magazines will benefit, while smaller schools will be further damaged. Just a terrible idea.
Do these politicians not see the far-reaching effects of these laws? Teams that are on TV more often and are in magazines will benefit, while smaller schools will be further damaged. Just a terrible idea.
People are very short-sighted with this stuff. It's a TINY percentage of all NCAA sports that are profitable and could support paying players.
Letting CFB and CBB essentially go pro would be the death of a ton of programs. Only the biggest of the big would survive.
I don't have a problem with letting a player profit from their likeness or their own jersey sales but I think ultimately the sport will be worse off if this happens on a large scale.
has nothing to do with schools, just individuals. they'll pay taxes on it.They're going to mess it up for everybody.
Just like the NCAA games.
Colleges will just quit using any player on any school advertisement.
But if you can make money get ready to pay taxes. lol
Nebraska should pass the law like California and start paying their players. What's the NCAA going to do? If they don't let us compete for championships in 4-5 years so be it we weren't going to be anyway. At least this way we can use 'paying players' as a recruiting tool to attract the best talent. Win enough and in a couple of years when the NCAA concedes we'll look like we were ahead of the curve and talent wise we'll be ahead of the curve.
I hope the NCAA wins.I believe the NCAA will have the last say in this, I pity the athletes that are misled to believe it is ok to accept this money and find themselves disqualified to compete.
these are my favorite posts.
you're right the athletes do nothing to earn their schooling. it's a completely free ride given at random to lucky lottery winners.
Obviously the athletes that make $$$ off of their image would be taxed at ordinary income rates. Would they then be taxed by the state of their university or their residence? Also since their income is based of playing in different state, would they be taxed in those states much like professional athletes?
Personally I just see this as California try to find another way to get people paid so they can tax the hell out of them. Now with athletes possibly getting paid, could they also be taxed on the value of their scholarships? This raises so many more questions than it answers.
or not.I think you've hit the nail on the head here.
Obviously the athletes that make $$$ off of their image would be taxed at ordinary income rates. Would they then be taxed by the state of their university or their residence? Also since their income is based of playing in different state, would they be taxed in those states much like professional athletes?
Personally I just see this as California try to find another way to get people paid so they can tax the hell out of them. Now with athletes possibly getting paid, could they also be taxed on the value of their scholarships? This raises so many more questions than it answers.
or not.
scholarship entitlements and outside personal profit have nothing to do with one another.
Kyler Murray made $5M from the A's last year while playing football on scholarship at OU. Did this question come up one time?
also, did you hear 1 time there was jealousy in the locker room?
these concerns are old man yells at cloud levels of legitimate.
I think he hit the nail on the head with the tax revenue the state of California could siphon from the income from endorsed college players. Wider net remember.
I could not care less of old men, clouds, Kyler Murray, or locker room jealousy. Those Pandora box side demons I'll let you worry about.
more tax payers > less tax payers
If that is true, they they might want to make sure that the tax code as written is being followed, to ensure that either the athletes or their parents are reporting the scholarships and stipends as income on their tax returns.more tax payers > less tax payers
If that is true, they they might want to make sure that the tax code as written is being followed, to ensure that either the athletes or their parents are reporting the scholarships and stipends as income on their tax returns.
I know. I didn't say it applied to the new law. You said that "more tax payers > less tax payers". I'm saying that if you believe that more tax payers and more taxes are better, then maybe they should enforce the tax code that exists and be sure to collect the taxes they are due. It would be my guess that many of these athletes aren't reporting their scholarships on their tax returns and thus paying taxes on the room and board, stipends etc.code today says tuition portion is tax free, everything else is taxable & needs to be claimed by individual or those claiming them as a dependent.
I'd imagine this wouldn't change and really it's a non sequitur to this discussion/new rule.
the two have nothing to do with each other.
audit them?I know. I didn't say it applied to the new law. You said that "more tax payers > less tax payers". I'm saying that if you believe that more tax payers and more taxes are better, then maybe they should enforce the tax code that exists and be sure to collect the taxes they are due. It would be my guess that many of these athletes aren't reporting their scholarships on their tax returns and thus paying taxes on the room and board, stipends etc.
I don't care if they pay their taxes or not. It seems that part of your argument in favor of the new law is to collect more taxes on athletes. If that is your argument, than I would think you would be in favor of collecting taxes due from the athletes based on the current code as well, which may or may not be happening.audit them?
I don't care if they pay their taxes or not. It seems that part of your argument in favor of the new law is to collect more taxes on athletes. If that is your argument, than I would think you would be in favor of collecting taxes due from the athletes based on the current code as well, which may or may not be happening.
Anyone that thinks college football players should be paid please answer me how do you pay a player like Vaha Vainuku? Or Pernell Jefferson’s? These guys don’t deserve $$$. No one is profiting from them. They cost the university $$$. Or what about John Raridon? Raridon is a really good one to look at. He hasn’t played any meaningful minutes but was a 4 star US Army All American. Does he get locked into a salary out of high school as a way to land his commit? Does Trent Hixson get paid? If walk ons don’t get paid, does it delay coaches handing out scholarships to walk ons
The obvious effects of paying players IMO lead to a) cutting down the roster size b) cutting players c) free agency. Then we basically have the NFL. And if we all want the NFL we should just watch the NFL
nobody is talking about college football players being paid a salary simply for playing college football.
this is simply about their ability to market themselves and profit from it. if a company wants them in a commercial or to endorse their brand, they can now.
do you understand?
No thanks, no need to review the thread, I had responded specifically to your quote where you referenced the thread regarding the tax grab issue.seems you need to review the thread before jumping in
Which is why I posted my original response and I’ll say it again. If this is a fact, as you say, then it might make sense to make sure that the existing tax code is being upheld. If you disagree with this, then fine, but that would seem inconsistent with the thought that “more tax payers > less tax payers”.I stated a fact, which is more tax paying citizens is better than less tax paying citizens
No and Noare you arguing that fact? would you like more on the take?
Greatmy argument is people should be able to profit from their likeness. that's it. very simple. someone else brought up the tax grab issue, to which I respond: who cares? it's a means to a better end, in my opinion
Awesomenow kindly piss off, troll
The question is, do you put stipulations on how the players can profit from their likeness? What would stop Phil Knight from offering every top recruit a multi-million dollar Nike endorsement deal if they sign with Nike? What would stop boosters from paying them $100,000 for an autograph?