OSU AD Smith against Fair PayPlay Act
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/27743871/ohio-state-ad-gene-smith-fair-pay-play-act
His binding comment here is "One of our principles is try to create rules and regulations to try and achieve fair play." and that the CA ruling puts that in jeopardy.
If "fair play" is paramount Mr. Smith, how about:
1. We add another Big Ten school to Ohio to remove the unfair recruiting advantage you and a few other schools have of being the sole Power 5 school in a football rich state? This clearly makes for an uneven recruiting advantage.
2. We standardize admission standards across all Big Ten schools to remove your unfair admissions recruiting advantage by constantly admitting players who have no interest in playing school?
3. You come clean that it's not about fairness at all. It's about keeping the status quo that favors the dominance of your program and that of a few others who enjoy sizable advantages that are hardly fair.
4. The same way you and yours would say "tough shit" to schools like ours for your advantages, I'd give anything to turn around one day and say "tough shit" right back when the UM money that dwarfs OSU's is turned right back to provide Michigan the recruiting advantage.
In the meantime Mr. Smith, kindly stfu and sit down thanks.
October 1st, 2019 at 6:13 PM ^
Hot take from the school who led the Big Ten in "self-investigations."
October 1st, 2019 at 6:14 PM ^
Of course he is against it. You can't gain an advantage by paying players, if everyone else gets to do it legally
October 1st, 2019 at 11:07 PM ^
Ding, ding!
October 1st, 2019 at 6:21 PM ^
Has any major football school school been punished as severely for improper booster benefits as Ohio State was at the end of the Tressel era? Kind of funny to be so strongly against making something legal when you were busted doing it illegally.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:21 PM ^
USC - reggie bush
SMU - death penalty back in the '80's
October 1st, 2019 at 6:22 PM ^
It'll never happen but I want Warde to say he's all in favor.
"It's hard to beat the cheaters, but not when we can fire our money cannon."
October 1st, 2019 at 10:22 PM ^
Our money cannon isn’t as big as people think.....by sheer numbers, OSU and ASU could do some damage with their huge alumni base if everyone chipped in $100 a year.
October 1st, 2019 at 10:40 PM ^
You’re assuming painting stripes on highways pays well enough.
October 2nd, 2019 at 11:35 AM ^
I think the main problem is people are confusing the NIL rights with player salaries. It would be ridiculous and unsustainable if we just had player salaries with no caps. It would be no different than it is now—a few dominate schools—but it would just exchange the current dominate players for others. Texas A&M and OSU, for example, would be dominate players.
But NIL rights would require athletes to get their incomes from other sources. This means the market the school is located in suddenly becomes more important than the AD revenue, which is why the L.A. schools are the ones who began this push. OSU would probably still do well, since they have the whole state of Ohio and their alumni base, but they're probably concerned that it would allow Michigan (and other Big Ten schools) to catch up.
They're not afraid of their lack of market power, they're afraid of greater parity. That's why the schools that are loudly decrying these changes are the ones who have the most to lose from greater parity—Alabama, OSU, Clemson, etc.
October 1st, 2019 at 6:23 PM ^
Double post. Neg away, Merrill.
October 1st, 2019 at 6:25 PM ^
Please feel free to add.
Far as I can tell - scandals that Smith was there to "navigate":
Tattoogate
Pervy doc molesting entire wrestling team coverup.
Zach Smith and Urban Cryer encouraging punching women in the face, repeatedly, especially if they're your wife.
Ain't come here to play school (Fisher Price TM infringement).
Justin Fields apparently just started his academic career at tPOSu today.
October 1st, 2019 at 6:28 PM ^
Your wife has to be pregnant before you can punch her in the face. Everyone knows that.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:35 PM ^
Cardale Jones, who "didn't come to play school" earned his Bachelor's Degree from OSU, and is the first in his family to do so. From impoverished East Cleveland, OH, he's been paid almost $2m to hold a clipboard, and is an owner of football/mentorship gym in the Columbus metro. He gets a lot of grief for the quote, but this guy is a success.
October 1st, 2019 at 10:30 PM ^
You really that ducking fumb?
You can get a PhD from Theee OSU on line for $8.95. Google it.
October 2nd, 2019 at 6:09 AM ^
What about Spielman suing OSU for stealing former-player NIL right on banners at Ohio Stadium with Honda ads?
Not surprising, I guess.
October 1st, 2019 at 6:50 PM ^
Good to see Director Smith being relevant again after the tattoo fiasco. Welcome back!
October 1st, 2019 at 10:41 PM ^
I see what you did there. =)
October 1st, 2019 at 6:53 PM ^
No shit. It'll level the playing field Gene.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:09 PM ^
Pay to play would vastly benefit schools like OSU. They have a huge alumni base in a big city that could easily outbid just about everyone else. Who it would kill would be programs like MSU, Minnesota, Indiana, etc. They won’t even have a punchers chance.
It would probably kill the sport though. Big programs already have a big recruiting advantage as it sits. That gets magnified if they can use their vast resources to bring in more top talent.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:25 PM ^
I keep hearing this but I disagree. I think it would benefit other sports where kids may want to go there from out of state, but it's just too expensive. Schools only have so many scholarships, and kids want to play, so how many more 5 stars can OSU, Alabama, and Clemson take? I think people are overreacting. Duke, Kentucky and Kansas get whomever they want now, it can't get worse, but we can get our foot in some of those doors. I think it might be a good thing. Especially if the NCAA doesn't want it.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:31 PM ^
eh, the four-team playoff already killed the sport. At least this way, these kids could start getting money over the table.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:42 PM ^
I think it actually might help smaller schools get elite recruits. I know people think the money in college football is infinite, but there’s only so much to go around for each program. Boosters aren’t going to pay 20 kids a million dollar a year in each class. That’s 80 million in 4 recruiting classes. I’m just making up numbers because we have no idea what the market would truly be like. And that’s not considering basketball or other sports. MSU might be willing to outbid the elite schools for certain players. Say there’s a big time RB recruit in the MW. OSU and Michigan are already putting money toward a couple RBs from the previous few classes. MSU could offer this one kid they have a shot with more than OSU or Michigan are. Now granted, OSU and Michigan are going to have more talented rosters up and down, but it won’t work out for a kid here or there. It’s not all that different from what we have now anyways.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:19 PM ^
If you want a level playing field, I'll give you two ways for that to happen
1.) Eliminate oversigning
2.) Eliminate grey-shirting
(I'm looking at you, Bama)
Do that, and players are forced to be spread to other schools.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:26 PM ^
We over sign also.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:36 PM ^
If by over sign, you mean we sign more than 25 sometimes, fine. But we don't do it for the specific reason of targeting a grey shirt candidate (Bama's favored tactic), or stripping a scholarship offer - both for the intentional purpose of stockpiling talent. We do it when there are scholarships available to offer because of (grad) transfers or 5th year handshakes. That's a very different thing from doing what the SEC factories are doing...
October 2nd, 2019 at 5:17 AM ^
If you sign more kids to scholarships than you actually have available, you are over signing. We have 15 available, after graduation and you sign 26 kids, that's the definition of over signing. We have also grey shirted kids.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:21 PM ^
This is basically the weed dealer opposing legalization to protect his illicit profits.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:26 PM ^
Regarding point 2, is there any evidence that Ohio State's academic admittance standards for football (and basketball, I suppose) players is "easier" than Michigan's?
October 1st, 2019 at 7:28 PM ^
We aren't Stanford in that regard. We take kids that would never be allowed in if they weren't very good in there sport.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:37 PM ^
Right, the same as Ohio State. The fact is that the two schools are going after the same recruits much of the time, and it's silly to suggest that players at one couldn't gain admittance to the other.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:03 PM ^
I’d love more info here. Say with regard to JUCO as well. I was always under the impression UM had higher academic standards than OSU for admission of players. I could be wrong.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:55 PM ^
I think that is true regarding transfers (JUCOs rarely get admitted at Michigan), but for incoming freshmen, I don't think there is much difference.
October 1st, 2019 at 10:05 PM ^
wellll except during Tressel's time, they did. Any reason to think much has changed?
Justin Fields doesn't even have to be on campus, it's all distance learning... before and after Cardale Jones everyone knows they don't have to play skool there
October 1st, 2019 at 7:34 PM ^
The CA bill would destroy college athletics in the long run. The Dukes and Kentuckys would absolutely rule basketball with no exceptions and the Bamas, OSUs and Clemsons would steamroll college football for the foreseeable future as they could monopolize all the 5 stars as their deep pockets could shell out all the dollars and football would be unwatchable in short order.
Of course these schools have an advantage already so what's the difference you ask? No one else could ever dethrone them.
If forcing everyone to give 4-year schollies Instead of one yr scholarships like the SEC does the rest of college football would have a chance. As long as Saban is at Bama he will be at the head of the table. And as long as OSU fakes athletes going to school, they will rule the BIG.
With this CA bill, the best cheaters will own college sports. Cheat or go home.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:08 PM ^
Because those programs struggle so much as it is.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:12 PM ^
You could not be more wrong. The best cheaters already are winning. The athletes will want exposure, & they won't get that by riding the bench behind all the other 5 stars. The current system is ridiculous & needs to be replaced by NIL legislation. Who in the fuck is 18 years old in this country & unable to earn money?
October 1st, 2019 at 8:57 PM ^
The Dukes and Kentuckys would absolutely rule basketball with no exceptions and the Bamas, OSUs and Clemsons would steamroll college football
This seems like backwards thinking. Once paying players is legalized, these cheating schools should lose their competitive edge, if anything.
October 1st, 2019 at 10:07 PM ^
The best cheaters would lose some of their cheating advantage.
Not all of it, mind you. Some.
October 2nd, 2019 at 1:47 AM ^
Do you know what this California bill does?
October 2nd, 2019 at 11:52 AM ^
This is so backwards. It's about promotions, not direct salary pay. This means that Minnesota's star player can work with companies to promote their goods throughout the state of Minnesota. Therefore, a player who might consider waiting in line at Alabama would probably prefer to be the star at Minnesota. Right now being the star player at Minnesota just gets you on TV to help fill the coffers of your school and being a third-string Alabama player gets you a free car, cash, and a very shady insurance program that guarantees you will make the league (it's similar to injury insurance that many top athletes get to protect themselves before the draft, but in Alabama's case it pays out to every athlete THAT DOESN'T LAND ON AN NFL TEAM AND IT'S FUNDED BY ? ).
With NIL, it's better to go be the star at some place like Minnesota. You also get money, you can then afford your own car, and that insurance scheme isn't worth the payout anymore (promotions will pay you more and immediately). Also, it appeals to a player's ego. By having access to the NIL rights, they can develop a "personal brand," one that makes choosing a non-standard big name school more appealing. It makes you stick out more and it allows you to better monopolize the market. Alabama players will all have to compete with one another for promotional deals and there can only be so many big fish in that pond.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:39 PM ^
October 1st, 2019 at 8:04 PM ^
Michigan’s endowment would beg to differ.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:17 PM ^
Michigan's endowment is also not going to be used to pay football players.
October 1st, 2019 at 10:37 PM ^
October 1st, 2019 at 7:40 PM ^
double post. Pressed save twice somehow.
October 1st, 2019 at 7:54 PM ^
Gene Smith is also against investigating potential domestic abuse.
October 1st, 2019 at 8:03 PM ^
Obviously an OSU AD crying about a lack of fairness is hypocritical beyond belief.
However, I would hate to see the day when college football becomes nothing more than another minor league pro sport. If it becomes purely about schools buying players, why should I watch?
October 1st, 2019 at 8:06 PM ^
That would be better than watching schools who don’t pay players playing schools who do pay players like it is now no?
October 1st, 2019 at 9:55 PM ^
Because when the clean schools win it makes it all the more impressive.
Personally, I'm more on the side of "burn this village down in order to save it" attitude. I would rather that the governing bodies take real (though more difficult) action to separate money-driven athletics from college sports instead of enabling it.
No one is forcing kids to play college sports. Every revenue generating sport has some form of professional minor league available. If a kid wants their money immediately, they can go that route instead of the going to school (which is the compromise of deferred compensation while undertaking training/development that will likely lead to much higher earnings after school). If a condition of getting a full ride at a school and a shot a becoming college sports star is waiving the NIL rights for just those few years, I'm sure most players would still take that deal.
October 2nd, 2019 at 11:55 AM ^
Because when the clean schools win it makes it all the more impressive.
Has that happened this century?