02-06-24 07:05 AM - Post#362833 In response to Bruno
this is so confusing to me.... in terms of implications
how are the benefits to the employees (players) higher than the costs in a program that doesnt make money? (assuming correct) where players arent on scholarships which is also tricky
i guess i understand point on "working" conditions but most obvious impact is that means you fly charter to lawrence kansas in a pay game but maybe at the expense of womens fencing being financed?
i guess i do get the implications at usc if cali rules this way though i am not sure how many basketball programs outside of a few conferences are wildly profitable
football in sec a different story obv but players are already getting paid a bundle and if anything this tax could offset benefits already obtained. so net net could hurt those players you'd think