<v Speaker 1>Wednesday, December seventeenth, twenty twenty five, you are listening to

<v Speaker 1>the Daily Gough Sports podcast and I am your host,

<v Speaker 1>Clinton Daily, coming to you from the Mile High City

<v Speaker 1>here in Denver, Colorado, and we are back for another

<v Speaker 1>week of talking sports with a dose of common sense. Hey,

<v Speaker 1>Happy Wednesday to you. I hope you had a good weekend.

<v Speaker 1>I hope your week is going well and that you,

<v Speaker 1>your family, your friends, everyone in your world is staying

<v Speaker 1>strong and healthy right now. And what a wild weekend

<v Speaker 1>it has been in the world of sports. Holy cow,

<v Speaker 1>Michigan football is involved in another cheating scandal, well sort of,

<v Speaker 1>I mean it's a different kind of cheating. It apparently

<v Speaker 1>was cheating. Indiana quarterback Fernando Mendoza won the Heisman on Saturday,

<v Speaker 1>which Big Rob and I actually predicted a few weeks back,

<v Speaker 1>although I think this last weekend we both kind of

<v Speaker 1>pulled our votes when we kept seeing Fernando Mendoza do

<v Speaker 1>that fake crying thing in every single one of his interviews.

<v Speaker 1>That is a weird guy. You're a weird guy. Weird guy.

<v Speaker 1>Philip Rivers is back in the NFL at the age

<v Speaker 1>of forty four, which is ironic because I think that's

<v Speaker 1>also his belt size, and just as he did in

<v Speaker 1>his prime, he almost won a game. The Kansas City

<v Speaker 1>Chiefs are out of the NFL playoffs. The Denver Broncos

<v Speaker 1>have the best record in football.

<v Speaker 2>What year is it?

<v Speaker 1>How long have I been out? Was I asleep? We

<v Speaker 1>also saw superstars Patrick Mahomes and Micah Parsons blow their

<v Speaker 1>knees out on the same day. Now that actually might

<v Speaker 1>be due. I'm not sure if I've ever seen that,

<v Speaker 1>for I don't remember two big stars having a season

<v Speaker 1>ending injury on the same day before. A little bit different,

<v Speaker 1>speaking of things, we have already seen. The college football

<v Speaker 1>playoff kicks off this Friday, and we are going to

<v Speaker 1>get a rematch, actually two rematches of games that we

<v Speaker 1>have already seen this year. At six pm, the ten

<v Speaker 1>and three nine seed Alabama Crinison's Tide will head into

<v Speaker 1>Norman to face the number eight seed ten and two

<v Speaker 1>Oklahoma Sooners. Now the winner is going to move on

<v Speaker 1>and face number one Indiana. But of course you remember

<v Speaker 1>these two teams already square it off earlier this year

<v Speaker 1>in Tuscalosa, and the Senters actually squeaked out of twenty

<v Speaker 1>three to twenty one went on the road. So how

<v Speaker 1>in the world is Alabama going to go into Norman

<v Speaker 1>and win this game? Well, I think they're mostly going

<v Speaker 1>to do it because they actually have some offense and

<v Speaker 1>it doesn't seem like Oklahoma does. Remember in that first matchup,

<v Speaker 1>Alabama completely outplayed the Sooners, but they kept turning the

<v Speaker 1>ball over. Okay, so in this game, Alabama is favored

<v Speaker 1>by one point five. I'm not gonna feel great about it,

<v Speaker 1>but I'm going to take Alabama to go into Oklahoma

<v Speaker 1>to win and to cover. We move on to Saturday morning,

<v Speaker 1>where the ten am game is going to feature the

<v Speaker 1>number ten Miami Hurricanes going to College Station Texas to

<v Speaker 1>face the number seven Texas A and m Aggies, or

<v Speaker 1>it's the winner of this game will go on to

<v Speaker 1>face number two Ohio State. Now let me ask you this,

<v Speaker 1>why is this game not in primetime? I have no idea.

<v Speaker 1>This should be the best game of the first round. Now,

<v Speaker 1>Miami has been dominant upfront in pretty much every game

<v Speaker 1>they played this year. They're going to be good again here,

<v Speaker 1>but I don't know that they can push around A

<v Speaker 1>and M. Here's what I want to watch in this game,

<v Speaker 1>especially early who can run the ball, because that's going

<v Speaker 1>to be a big advantage. And I want to see

<v Speaker 1>which version of Texas A and M quarterback Marcel Reid

<v Speaker 1>we're going to get because we've seen him be really

<v Speaker 1>good and we've seen him be really bad. In fact,

<v Speaker 1>we've seen it in the same game. If he's good,

<v Speaker 1>I think the Aggies are going to roll here. If

<v Speaker 1>he's not, I think this is going to be a dogfight,

<v Speaker 1>and I think it could come down to the last possession.

<v Speaker 1>An m is favored by three and a half. I

<v Speaker 1>don't know if Miami has been in an environment like

<v Speaker 1>College Station will be thought. I'm gonna take the Aggies

<v Speaker 1>to cover and win. One thirty pm Mountain Standard time,

<v Speaker 1>we will have the number eleven seed Tulane Green Wave,

<v Speaker 1>winners of that American Athletic Conference, heading to Oxford to

<v Speaker 1>face the number six Old Miss Rebels again, because yes,

<v Speaker 1>we have seen this game already. Two. You might remember

<v Speaker 1>the Rebels pasted the Green Wave back in September forty

<v Speaker 1>five to ten, but remember that was when Ole Miss

<v Speaker 1>still had their head coach Lane Kiffin. He is not

<v Speaker 1>left for LSU, so this could be a totally different outcome,

<v Speaker 1>then again to Lane. Head coach John Summerl is also leaving.

<v Speaker 1>He's going to Florida. Never mind, Ole Miss is favored

<v Speaker 1>by seventeen and a half. I actually think they're gonna

<v Speaker 1>cover that number. I'll take ole Miss big and they

<v Speaker 1>will move on to face Georgia, an SEC matchup that

<v Speaker 1>should be very interesting. Our final first round college football

<v Speaker 1>playoff game will feature the number twelve James Madison, duke's

<v Speaker 1>winner of the Sun Belt Conference, facing the number five

<v Speaker 1>Oregon Ducks. And I'll say this, if you haven't seen

<v Speaker 1>the JMU sports social media account where they are just

<v Speaker 1>over there talking crazy about the Ducks, you're missing out.

<v Speaker 1>They're killing it. It's pretty funny. But also remember James

<v Speaker 1>Madison head coach Bob Jesney is leaving for UCLA and

<v Speaker 1>James Madison has not seen speed like this. Oregon is

<v Speaker 1>favored by twenty one and a half. That's a huge number,

<v Speaker 1>and yet I'm not sure it's big enough. I think

<v Speaker 1>Oregon rolls and covers and moves on to play Texas Tech.

<v Speaker 1>I'm not sure we're gonna get great games in this

<v Speaker 1>first round. Oh but that second round, yeah, you can

<v Speaker 1>tell it might be highly highly entertaining. Hey, today I'm

<v Speaker 1>a does I've got something completely different for you. I

<v Speaker 1>know everyone is talking about the college football playoff this week. Hey,

<v Speaker 1>I love college sports. I love college football every year.

<v Speaker 1>I love marsh mad and US every year. There is

<v Speaker 1>nothing more exciting than seeing college athletes trying to make

<v Speaker 1>a name for themselves. I've been watching it since I

<v Speaker 1>was a little kid. Well, I've got some bad news.

<v Speaker 1>With the way that all of these things have transpired

<v Speaker 1>in college athletics, with universities now paying athletes, I'm telling

<v Speaker 1>you there could be another shoe about to drop. I've

<v Speaker 1>been warning that this was coming, and it might not

<v Speaker 1>be pretty. College sports as we know them could actually

<v Speaker 1>cease to exist. And I know that sounds crazy, but

<v Speaker 1>unfortunately it's true. I've got a guest today that understands

<v Speaker 1>these things far better than I and I think it's

<v Speaker 1>going to be well worth your time to listen to.

<v Speaker 1>In fact, let's jump into that interview right now. Joining

<v Speaker 1>us this week on the Daily Dose. Thomas McGovern is

<v Speaker 1>a CPA, CFA, and CFO. He has spent two decades

<v Speaker 1>on Wall Street. Not only does he have financial expertise,

<v Speaker 1>but he also has a deep passion for college sports,

<v Speaker 1>makes him someone I want to talk to you. Thomas

<v Speaker 1>has recently authored a book called Road to the Final Hour,

<v Speaker 1>The catastrophic tax Consequences of the Professionalization of College Sports.

<v Speaker 1>But here's what I like about Thomas. In this book,

<v Speaker 1>Thomas has not only diagnosed a problem that's easy to do.

<v Speaker 1>A lot of people diagnose problems. We hear it on

<v Speaker 1>sports talk all the time. Oh, here's the problem, here's

<v Speaker 1>a problem. He also has a blueprint for a solution.

<v Speaker 1>Makes it very, very different when you're actually saying, well,

<v Speaker 1>here's how to fix it. Thomas is joining us today

<v Speaker 1>to discuss practical strategies to avoid these consequences and some

<v Speaker 1>of his ideas for affecting real change. He is here

<v Speaker 1>to tell us how to preserve college sports before it's

<v Speaker 1>too late. Thomas McGovern, Welcome to the Daily Joy.

<v Speaker 2>Thank you Clinton. Glad to be here.

<v Speaker 1>Thomas. Where did your passion for college you know, sports,

<v Speaker 1>amateur sports in general come from. Were you a former

<v Speaker 1>athlete or how did this all get started?

<v Speaker 3>No, you know, not a former athlete, a fan professional sports.

<v Speaker 3>Grew up in New York, so it was very much

<v Speaker 3>a pro environment. But later on going to Virginia for

<v Speaker 3>a grad school and now living in the South and

<v Speaker 3>Charlotte College. Sports truly is a big institution down You're

<v Speaker 3>somewhat of our religion, and it's an important part of

<v Speaker 3>our culture in the United States. And you know, that's

<v Speaker 3>why I wrote the book, And I would say the

<v Speaker 3>genesis of the book. You know, already having a passion

<v Speaker 3>for college sports, I also served on different governing boards

<v Speaker 3>for colleges and universities. I kind of dovetail with athletics.

<v Speaker 3>And I attended a conference eight years ago of the

<v Speaker 3>Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities in Dallas,

<v Speaker 3>and at the time, they were talking about a lot

<v Speaker 3>of different issues. You had freedom of speech, you had

<v Speaker 3>declining enrollment, you had rise and costs of education, and

<v Speaker 3>of course intercollegiate athletics. And one of things they noted

<v Speaker 3>is that these trustees, you know, some of them have

<v Speaker 3>served on their athletic committees, on their boards. They were

<v Speaker 3>concerned that not only would these recent trends, but back

<v Speaker 3>eight years ago trends right, not only would those trends

<v Speaker 3>increase their costs, but they could potentially jeopardize their tax

<v Speaker 3>exem status, and you know, one trustee put it, you know,

<v Speaker 3>we will have killed the golden goose, and you know,

<v Speaker 3>they really did have some consternation about this. Now, my thought,

<v Speaker 3>as as someone that was there, was that, Okay, it's

<v Speaker 3>good that you guys kind of understand this, right. You

<v Speaker 3>guys are people that can afford to doin eight millions

<v Speaker 3>of dollars to be on a board of trustees. But

<v Speaker 3>I don't think there really is a general understanding of

<v Speaker 3>this out there amongst the broader fan base. And so

<v Speaker 3>I ended up writing a larger book about higher education

<v Speaker 3>when I was on non compete leave, and then it

<v Speaker 3>went back on the shelf when I returned to work.

<v Speaker 3>But in the last several years, as these trends it

<v Speaker 3>accelerated with college sports, I realized I had to kind

<v Speaker 3>of carve that part of it out and publish it

<v Speaker 3>as a separate book.

<v Speaker 1>Okay, Thomas, With a change in college athletics, players of course,

<v Speaker 1>can now be paid by the universities. This is no

<v Speaker 1>longer amateur athletics. You talk about it in your book,

<v Speaker 1>But what is the collision course that college sports is on?

<v Speaker 1>And you know, why in the world are you looking

<v Speaker 1>less at compensation and more at the taxation side.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I would say, you know, even though that amateurism

<v Speaker 3>is no longer really applicable to current college sports, I

<v Speaker 3>don't think it ever was in the colloquial sense that

<v Speaker 3>we use amateurism.

<v Speaker 1>Right, You're right.

<v Speaker 3>I think amateurism kind of developed this voluntarism into a nation,

<v Speaker 3>and it's just not it's never been accurate. It probably

<v Speaker 3>hasn't be accurate for about one hundred years. And I

<v Speaker 3>would say today, even with revenue sharing and NIL, I

<v Speaker 3>do believe that college sports still would fall into kind

<v Speaker 3>of the definition what I call non professionalism. Right, it's

<v Speaker 3>not voluntarism, but you know, you receive some compensation similar

<v Speaker 3>to the way Olympic athletes receive endorsements and whatnot, but

<v Speaker 3>you know, they compete for free, and I believe that

<v Speaker 3>that is conducive to tax exemption.

<v Speaker 2>And you know, one of the things that you do.

<v Speaker 3>See a lot or hear a lot rather is that

<v Speaker 3>there is a dialogue out there that with all the

<v Speaker 3>controversy around NL, and there's no shortage of complaints about it,

<v Speaker 3>that it would be simpler and maybe more transparent if

<v Speaker 3>the athletes were simply paid employees of the school on

<v Speaker 3>a roster of you know, football team, basketball team, and

<v Speaker 3>revenue sport. This does neglect some very serious, uh you know,

<v Speaker 3>tax and financial implications. One of the big reasons that

<v Speaker 3>college sports has been so successful over the last decades

<v Speaker 3>is that it has been exempt from from taxes federal

<v Speaker 3>taxes as well as most state taxes. And so if

<v Speaker 3>you have a situation whereby players are employed as professional athletes,

<v Speaker 3>that's no longer something that deserves charitable exemption, right. They

<v Speaker 3>have a twofold exemption in the code. They contribute importantly

<v Speaker 3>to the educational mission of the schools, and they also

<v Speaker 3>promote amateur athletics. Under a professionalized system, neither of those

<v Speaker 3>would apply. They would lose their tax exemption, and as

<v Speaker 3>are described in the book, the financial consequence of that

<v Speaker 3>would really be catastrophic.

<v Speaker 1>Tell us your background is a little bit unique. I'm

<v Speaker 1>coming more from the sports side, from the coaching side

<v Speaker 1>of things. I look at this and it doesn't all

<v Speaker 1>make sense to me. But you're looking at it as

<v Speaker 1>a completely different angle. You're looking at it from the

<v Speaker 1>side of being a CPA, CFA that kind of thing.

<v Speaker 1>How does that financial expertise and experience give you a

<v Speaker 1>different view of this whole thing.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean, as a Wall Street analyst and banker,

<v Speaker 3>I'm used to looking at p and ls and balance sheets,

<v Speaker 3>and you know what I see with regard to college

<v Speaker 3>sports p and ls is that you know, their revenue

<v Speaker 3>for the most part, on the FBS side or among

<v Speaker 3>SBS programs, you know, a plurality of their revenue is

<v Speaker 3>generated from conference distributions metia rites revenue they've already agreed

<v Speaker 3>to share as part of the House settlement. What is

<v Speaker 3>their second largest source of revenue at the FBS level

<v Speaker 3>is charitable contributions. And so now if you have a

<v Speaker 3>loss of tax exem status, they would no longer be

<v Speaker 3>able to solicit those charitable contributions, or they could list them,

<v Speaker 3>but they would no longer be tax deductible. And in

<v Speaker 3>the fundraising world, that really is the kiss of death.

<v Speaker 3>You can probably expect that to dry up to next

<v Speaker 3>to nothing. And so you have a serious loss of

<v Speaker 3>revenue from both the loss of charitable contributions as well

<v Speaker 3>as revenue sharing. And you're also going to see government

<v Speaker 3>support and institutional support kind of a road as well.

<v Speaker 3>And that's FCS and no football, those subdivisions actually generate

<v Speaker 3>most of their revenue that way, and I don't think

<v Speaker 3>it's going to be possible for governments and institutions to

<v Speaker 3>support something that's not really a charity anymore. And so

<v Speaker 3>you have a big revenue effect, and then on the

<v Speaker 3>expense side, you're going to have a very large increase

<v Speaker 3>in player costs. Right sure today, let's not say it.

<v Speaker 3>Last year, the twenty twenty three to twenty twenty four

<v Speaker 3>academic year, the average cost of a public institution for

<v Speaker 3>an out of state student was roughly twenty four thousand dollars.

<v Speaker 3>So if you think about a scholarship for somebody that

<v Speaker 3>costs twenty four thousand dollars a player versus what you

<v Speaker 3>would be paid under employment, which you know people are

<v Speaker 3>not going to be getting Lebron James money. I think

<v Speaker 3>that is very much a fantasy. You would look more

<v Speaker 3>to like the NBA G League or perhaps Arena football.

<v Speaker 3>And let's just say someone's getting paid fifty thousand dollars

<v Speaker 3>a year, right base salary. So now you've doubled your costs.

<v Speaker 3>And the problem with this now is that even at

<v Speaker 3>a fifty thousand dollars base salary, on an after tax basis,

<v Speaker 3>that's barely covering your cost to attend that school, and

<v Speaker 3>so you're probably going to need to keep the grant

<v Speaker 3>and need component to it. So now your costs have

<v Speaker 3>actually tripled. And this well it sounds like okay, a

<v Speaker 3>small number on individual basis or maybe even a program basis.

<v Speaker 3>Across the system, it reaches into over a billion dollars

<v Speaker 3>of cost. So now you've got costs through the roof,

<v Speaker 3>you've got revenue down, and what's ever left over is

<v Speaker 3>actually subject to federal taxes under something called unrelated business

<v Speaker 3>taxable income, So you'd have a twenty one percent federal

<v Speaker 3>tax rate and you'd be exposed to stay taxes as well.

<v Speaker 3>So what that would mean, at least, you know, even

<v Speaker 3>for the most successful programs, is that it would diminish

<v Speaker 3>or perhaps eliminate their ability to subsidize non revenue sports.

<v Speaker 3>And for certain less successful programs, they may not even

<v Speaker 3>be able to pay their bills at the revenue sport level,

<v Speaker 3>so they become insolvent. So you're talking about a very

<v Speaker 3>systemic issue here on their professionalization.

<v Speaker 1>Hey, just quick reminder, you should be stopping by daily

<v Speaker 1>you do sports dot com each and every week and

<v Speaker 1>checking out the new things we've got going on over there.

<v Speaker 1>We have links to the podcast, we have links to

<v Speaker 1>the video, and we have links to new articles that

<v Speaker 1>I post each week that are a little more local

<v Speaker 1>in flavor. In fact, I posted one this week, but

<v Speaker 1>the Denver Bronc is getting a big win over the

<v Speaker 1>Green Bay Packers. Didn't see that. You might want to

<v Speaker 1>go check it out. Also, remember you can email the

<v Speaker 1>podcast at Dailydosports at gmail dot com. Love to hear

<v Speaker 1>from you listeners, always entertaining, and you can pick up

<v Speaker 1>some Daily Doose gear over at dealodes sports dot com

<v Speaker 1>as well t shirts, hoodies, sweatshirts, baseball caps. You might

<v Speaker 1>be needing that one last gift for someone on your list,

<v Speaker 1>make sure your head over to delodosports dot com. Thomas

<v Speaker 1>your The headline number in your book is five point

<v Speaker 1>seven billion dollars with a B. You just talked about it.

<v Speaker 1>You laid that out a little bit, five point seven billion.

<v Speaker 1>They're gonna want that money. It's a heavy amount.

<v Speaker 3>It's a it's a it's a big number. And that

<v Speaker 3>that is a revenue number, so that doesn't include the costs.

<v Speaker 3>I just swam through and it doesn't include the taxes

<v Speaker 3>that that number is a composite of the foregone revenue

<v Speaker 3>from the loss of charitable contributions, loss of government support,

<v Speaker 3>and institutional support across you know all three of the

<v Speaker 3>major subdivisions of college of sports, right, you know, FBS, FCS,

<v Speaker 3>and no football, And that represents roughly forty four percent

<v Speaker 3>of the revenue of all those schools put together. Right, Essentially,

<v Speaker 3>all of college sports put together is roughly a twelve

<v Speaker 3>point nine billion dollar annual revenue based on twenty twenty

<v Speaker 3>three numbers. It's probably a little larger now, but the

<v Speaker 3>loss of that money would be substantial.

<v Speaker 2>Right.

<v Speaker 3>You think about forty four percent decline in revenue, and

<v Speaker 3>this doesn't include revenue share, and then you've got a

<v Speaker 3>trebling of expenses, and then on top of that taxes.

<v Speaker 3>You're talking about a prescription for financial disaster TOMS.

<v Speaker 1>Can you explain U b TI. I believe it's unrelated

<v Speaker 1>business taxable incractible income.

<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's tax that is weighed on.

<v Speaker 3>Essentially, an organization or entity that's normally tax exempt, like

<v Speaker 3>a church or a school, engaging in a business that

<v Speaker 3>is not considered to be important to its charitable purpose,

<v Speaker 3>and so certain churches have actually gotten hit with it

<v Speaker 3>by operating, you know, for kind of what they consider

<v Speaker 3>to be somewhat for profit enterprises on the side, you know,

<v Speaker 3>the IRS's rule, that's not really part of the church's mission. Similarly,

<v Speaker 3>a professionalized college athletics system would really no longer contribute

<v Speaker 3>importantly to the educational mission of the college and university,

<v Speaker 3>so it would be considered an outside a unrelated business

<v Speaker 3>and therefore subject unrelated business taxable income.

<v Speaker 1>That's getting a little bit scary. I got to ask

<v Speaker 1>you this. This came out this past week the University

<v Speaker 1>of Utah announced a plan to help their athletic department

<v Speaker 1>generate new revenue streams. They're talking about maybe kind of

<v Speaker 1>a first you know, first of what they say could

<v Speaker 1>be many. They're talking about they could generate some serious

<v Speaker 1>revenue with a private equity firm. Does this model make

<v Speaker 1>any sense for other universities or is this something we're

<v Speaker 1>going to see?

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and you know, there's been at least a couple

<v Speaker 3>of headlines on that, and you know, I think, look,

<v Speaker 3>private equity investment is a good thing. You know, these

<v Speaker 3>sponsors come into companies that are relatively middle stage or

<v Speaker 3>not ready to be public yet. And this is in

<v Speaker 3>the for profit world. But what I think college sports

<v Speaker 3>would want is a is a financial investor, right and

<v Speaker 3>so one that's not interested in any other ulterior motives.

<v Speaker 3>I think there was a private equity investor out there

<v Speaker 3>that I felt might have been more activist than financial oriented,

<v Speaker 3>and that's not going to be a good thing. But

<v Speaker 3>I think the issue with private equity is that private equity,

<v Speaker 3>for the most part, if they're going to be a

<v Speaker 3>passive financial investor, they're going to want to invest in

<v Speaker 3>something that's profitable. And if this model is not profitable,

<v Speaker 3>then private equity is not going to be interested in

<v Speaker 3>investing in it.

<v Speaker 1>Why is it absolutely critical and it is that average

<v Speaker 1>college sports fans understand this whole situation, that they understand

<v Speaker 1>what a threat this really can be to college programs.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's very important that the broader fan base understand this.

<v Speaker 3>There is unfortunately a group of people that's very small

<v Speaker 3>that understands this topic very well and a kind of

<v Speaker 3>a broader group that needs to be somewhat educated on it.

<v Speaker 3>And there is a bill in Congress right now called

<v Speaker 3>the Score Act. It's making its way. I think onto

<v Speaker 3>the floor of the House, and it's likely going to

<v Speaker 3>pass the House. And this bill actually does, you know,

<v Speaker 3>creates the entire composite of legislative goals that are necessary

<v Speaker 3>what we've talked about eight years ago at that conference.

<v Speaker 3>This does all the things that you know, that they wanted,

<v Speaker 3>that we wanted. You know, First, it regulates nil you know,

<v Speaker 3>instead of it being a patchwork of state laws. And

<v Speaker 3>then secondly, it creates an exemption from anti trust legislation

<v Speaker 3>for the governing bodies in college sports. So the various conferences,

<v Speaker 3>maybe the College Sports Commission, the NCAA, they can enforce

<v Speaker 3>rules without being beset by anti trust lawsuits. And the

<v Speaker 3>third thing that it does, it makes it very clear

<v Speaker 3>that college athletes are not employees of the schools they

<v Speaker 3>play for. They remain independent contractors, which means they retain

<v Speaker 3>their NL rights, they will likely do better financially with those,

<v Speaker 3>and they would underemployment. And then the sports system college

<v Speaker 3>sports system can retain its charitable tax exemption. And this well,

<v Speaker 3>maybe we'll maybe will pass the House, faces somewhat an

<v Speaker 3>uphill battle in the Senate. So it's important that the

<v Speaker 3>broader fan base of you know, whoever, many college football

<v Speaker 3>fans are out there, one hundred million really understands this

<v Speaker 3>and pushes for the passage of this bill because it's

<v Speaker 3>going to mean the future of college sports.

<v Speaker 1>It absolutely is, And what you're saying makes so much sense.

<v Speaker 1>I'm asking you the million dollar question here, and this

<v Speaker 1>might be difficult to answer, but if we don't see

<v Speaker 1>this pass in the next two to five years, we've

<v Speaker 1>already seen the changes that have taken place so quick already.

<v Speaker 1>Can you paint kind of a picture of what we're

<v Speaker 1>going to see going forward?

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I think if you don't have any action by

<v Speaker 3>Congress and fortunate, the fault is going to be employment.

<v Speaker 3>You know, college athletes will be employees of their institutions.

<v Speaker 3>You'll see unionization, you'll see collective bargaining, and that will

<v Speaker 3>avoid their charitable exemption. So all those financial issues that

<v Speaker 3>I mentioned will come in the pass And then I

<v Speaker 3>think it's going to accelerate a lot of trends that

<v Speaker 3>sports fans are already complaining about. Right conference realignments for

<v Speaker 3>the sake of generating more revenue that create these hectic

<v Speaker 3>schedules with crazy travel requirements. You're going to see a

<v Speaker 3>lot more of that, and I actually think it could

<v Speaker 3>even get worse. And you'll see certain schools that are

<v Speaker 3>very successful perhaps look the kind of negotiate their own deals,

<v Speaker 3>similar to Notre Dame having its own contract with NBC

<v Speaker 3>to try to disintermediate the conferences to get a larger

<v Speaker 3>revenue share to cover their higher costs. And then you'll

<v Speaker 3>see really the larger programs doing a lot better visa

<v Speaker 3>vis the smaller ones or the less successful ones. And

<v Speaker 3>so I think you could see some issues there with

<v Speaker 3>certain programs going away having scheduling issues. It becoming a

<v Speaker 3>much different landscape than it is today.

<v Speaker 1>Well, and I know the pushback that someone like you

<v Speaker 1>is probably going to get. The pushback is going to be, hey,

<v Speaker 1>you're just opposed to these college kids making money. They

<v Speaker 1>might not understand the ramifications of what's involved in this.

<v Speaker 1>You're not a posed to that. You're trying to protect them.

<v Speaker 1>And as usual, so many times we see adults get

<v Speaker 1>involved with kids, not actually doing what's best for kids.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's the opposite of that. I actually wanted to

<v Speaker 3>see college athletes prosper. I think it's been a good

<v Speaker 3>thing in a lot of ways that students, student athletes

<v Speaker 3>are sticking around versus going into the NFL. You know,

<v Speaker 3>I get it.

<v Speaker 2>It's right.

<v Speaker 3>You're you maybe have some insurance against career ending industry.

<v Speaker 3>It's an injury that maybe pay you a million dollars

<v Speaker 3>if you get hurt. Whereas you get you're going to

<v Speaker 3>get a contract for eight figures.

<v Speaker 2>You know. The maths, just simple math. Right today?

<v Speaker 3>With NIL, you know, some of these athletes are doing

<v Speaker 3>very well, so I think it's a good thing. Now

<v Speaker 3>they are going to do a lot better in our

<v Speaker 3>NIL than they would under employment. Like I said, for

<v Speaker 3>the most part, student athletes would be paid commensurate to NBA,

<v Speaker 3>G League, Arena Football League, you know, minor league baseball players.

<v Speaker 3>Very few would ever get something like what the Superstars get. However,

<v Speaker 3>under NIL, they retain their NL rights. They can make

<v Speaker 3>unlimited money, they can get as many endorsements as they want.

<v Speaker 3>There's no well, they may ultimately be a cap under

<v Speaker 3>some of their legislation that's coming out. For for the

<v Speaker 3>most part, their upside is pretty significant. As a full

<v Speaker 3>time employee, you would expect them likely to relinquish those rights.

<v Speaker 3>The schools would need to capture that revenue in order

<v Speaker 3>to pay for the higher costs. So at the end

<v Speaker 3>of the day, employee and unionization and collective bargaining helps

<v Speaker 3>very few. If nobody hurts everybody, everyone is better off.

<v Speaker 3>In the environment that would be created by comprehensive federal

<v Speaker 3>legislation to give these college governing bodies a tax exemption,

<v Speaker 3>it shoulding an anti trust exemption, keep the industry's tax

<v Speaker 3>exempt status, and make sure that players retain independent contractor

<v Speaker 3>status and their rights to nil.

<v Speaker 1>Hey, this is such an important issue. And not only

<v Speaker 1>are we talking about, you know, the biggest and the best,

<v Speaker 1>and they, of course the big dogs are gonna they're

<v Speaker 1>going to succeed, but what about some of the mid

<v Speaker 1>level sports. What about some of the athletes that they're

<v Speaker 1>not going to get big. But we've got to protect

<v Speaker 1>all these kids because if left as it is, this

<v Speaker 1>is all going to go away.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's especially going to be important for non revenue

<v Speaker 3>sports and that if they do require or kind of

<v Speaker 3>live off the subsidies from the revenue sports, and if

<v Speaker 3>that model is impaired with higher costs and lower rev

<v Speaker 3>they really won't be very much revenue left for the

<v Speaker 3>non revenue sports. And those sports are the way that

<v Speaker 3>we incubate our Olympic talent. One of the exemptions in

<v Speaker 3>the Code for College Athletics was created in nineteen seventy

<v Speaker 3>six after our poor showing in the Montreal Olympics against

<v Speaker 3>the Soviets, to allow there to be a capitalized system

<v Speaker 3>with a tax exemption for incubating Olympic athletes. If we

<v Speaker 3>don't have revenue sports supporting those with their excess profits,

<v Speaker 3>then it's going to be interesting how they would support themselves.

<v Speaker 3>They would likely have to rely on contributions, and that

<v Speaker 3>presupposes that there isn't a contagion of professionalization into non

<v Speaker 3>revenue sports. What you're seeing already is Title nine kind

<v Speaker 3>of cropping up as a means to challenge certain the

<v Speaker 3>things that are going on, like the House settlement.

<v Speaker 2>Right now.

<v Speaker 3>Title nine. People are not kind of familiar with it.

<v Speaker 3>It's a federal law passed in the seventies kind of

<v Speaker 3>preventing discrimination against women by educational institutions, and it led

<v Speaker 3>to the really the crop up of a lot of

<v Speaker 3>new women's programs in college sports, which was a good thing.

<v Speaker 3>I think unfortunately today I can work in the other direction.

<v Speaker 3>If professionalization is viewed as being favorable visa the non professionalization,

<v Speaker 3>and you know, at the end of the day, the

<v Speaker 3>majority really lion's share of revenue sports or men's sports.

<v Speaker 3>If that's scene as a form of discrimination, there could

<v Speaker 3>be a call to say, well, all athletes should be

<v Speaker 3>employed revenue and non revenue and there simply isn't enough

<v Speaker 3>money in the system for that to happen. So you

<v Speaker 3>would ultimately just have to see a lot of schools

<v Speaker 3>would have to make decisions and hard decisions, and you

<v Speaker 3>would likely see a lot of cuts in these non

<v Speaker 3>revenue sports. And it's a shame because this is a

<v Speaker 3>way over one hundred thousand, one hundreds of thousands of

<v Speaker 3>students finance their education every year and actually have an

<v Speaker 3>opportunity to succeed in the United States.

<v Speaker 1>Well, and you bring up a really good point because

<v Speaker 1>not only is it the collegiate athletes, it's Olympic athletes.

<v Speaker 1>There's a lot of people that are going to lose

<v Speaker 1>that revenue and they're going to lose these opportunities, many

<v Speaker 1>of them that are not just changing you know, their year,

<v Speaker 1>or they're they're changing their lives. And we can't lose

<v Speaker 1>we can't lit track of that. Okay, Thomas I've got

<v Speaker 1>to ask you this, Where can listeners find your book?

<v Speaker 1>Where can they follow you? Where can they keep up

<v Speaker 1>with what you have going on? Because I really like

<v Speaker 1>what you're saying. What you're saying makes so much sense.

<v Speaker 1>But I mean, I know, for me, I want to

<v Speaker 1>keep up with with your thoughts as well as you know,

<v Speaker 1>seeing how things you know progress and that kind of thing.

<v Speaker 1>Where can we keep up with you?

<v Speaker 2>Yeah, a book is available on Amazon. Go on there.

<v Speaker 3>It's called Road to the Final Hour. It's basically Road

<v Speaker 3>to the Final Four where you're getting rid of one

<v Speaker 3>letter and placing an F with and H.

<v Speaker 2>So Road to the.

<v Speaker 3>Final Hour Thomas McGovern on Amazon. You can also check

<v Speaker 3>out my website Thomas McGovern dot CPA. And in the

<v Speaker 3>new year, myself and Spirit Media are going to be

<v Speaker 3>launching a podcast where we're going to talk about certain

<v Speaker 3>shoes on a week by week basis. I do expect

<v Speaker 3>there's going to be some acceleration in what goes on

<v Speaker 3>in Washington next year. The score at kind of lost

<v Speaker 3>some ground, given there was a there was a government

<v Speaker 3>shutdown in a lot of the priorities. But I do

<v Speaker 3>think it's going to be a goal for that bill

<v Speaker 3>to pass both Houses of Congress and go to President

<v Speaker 3>Trump by the end of next year, and so you're

<v Speaker 3>going to see a lot more headlines on that going

<v Speaker 3>into twenty twenty six.

<v Speaker 1>Well, Thomas, I cannot thank you enough for stopping by,

<v Speaker 1>for shedding light on what is a hugely important, you know,

<v Speaker 1>situation and something that's got to be it's got to

<v Speaker 1>be fixed and it's got to be improved because right now,

<v Speaker 1>I understand kids are making good money, and I understand

<v Speaker 1>that right now we're kind of playing in the wild

<v Speaker 1>West with college athletics. People have to know that stuff's

<v Speaker 1>going to dry up. It's going to go away very

<v Speaker 1>very quick as soon as you know, some of these

<v Speaker 1>things stars take place and it might get really, really ugly.

<v Speaker 1>And I'm worried for that. I'm scared for a lot

<v Speaker 1>of our collegiate athletes and a lot of our you know,

<v Speaker 1>a lot of people that might be listening and say, well,

<v Speaker 1>I don't have a college athlete yet. Well, you're going to,

<v Speaker 1>like kids are in school now, they're going to be

<v Speaker 1>looking forward to that. Okay, I've got one more question

<v Speaker 1>for you before I let you go, And again I

<v Speaker 1>want to thank you for your time. I've got to

<v Speaker 1>ask the big question college football playoff? Are you putting

<v Speaker 1>in a Notre Dame? Would you put in Miami, would

<v Speaker 1>you put in Alabama? What would have been your pick?

<v Speaker 1>How would you have got I think the committee got

<v Speaker 1>it right.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean, look, it's it's interesting because you saw

<v Speaker 3>you know, University of Virginia where I.

<v Speaker 2>Went to grad school.

<v Speaker 3>Yeah, you saw them play what ultimately was a disastrous

<v Speaker 3>game against Duke and you know, and that resulted in

<v Speaker 3>Miami being elevated to the playing again. Yeah, VI's a

<v Speaker 3>the Notre Dame. And you know, I actually think Notre

<v Speaker 3>Dame was the stronger team, but they did have a

<v Speaker 3>loss to Miami, and so it was it's a tough decision, right, Yeah.

<v Speaker 3>I would have voted for Notre Dame, you know, being

<v Speaker 3>in you know mcgovernor, you know, Irish guy going back

<v Speaker 3>to you know, everybody was everybody's a Notre Dame fan

<v Speaker 3>when you're Irish. So I would have voted for them.

<v Speaker 3>But I do understand the logic of the decision.

<v Speaker 1>I do, Thomas. I want to thank you so much

<v Speaker 1>for your time. I genuinely appreciate it. Hey, we'd love

<v Speaker 1>to have you back anytime. But I just want to

<v Speaker 1>thank you for stalking by it and and shedding spot

<v Speaker 1>and what really is an important subject.

<v Speaker 2>Great, thank you Clinton. Great being here.

<v Speaker 1>Hey. Next week on the Dose, once again, I have

<v Speaker 1>something completely different for you. It is going to be

<v Speaker 1>our Christmas Eve show. Oh but I am chasing a

<v Speaker 1>guest that is going to make this Christmas Eve show

<v Speaker 1>unique and hilarious. Trust me, you will not want to

<v Speaker 1>miss it. Be sure you check out the Dose next

<v Speaker 1>week and make sure you let a friend know to

<v Speaker 1>do the same.

<v Speaker 3>Hey.

<v Speaker 1>I want to say thank you so much Sir Thomas

<v Speaker 1>McGovern for stopping by and enlightening us with his knowledge

<v Speaker 1>on college sports. And I want to say thank you

<v Speaker 1>to each and every one of you for listening to

<v Speaker 1>the Daily Dose every week. Thank you for the emails,

<v Speaker 1>thank for the text thank for the tweets, but more

<v Speaker 1>than anything, thank you for sharing the show, for sharing

<v Speaker 1>the videos, and for sharing the articles. You absolutely love it.

<v Speaker 2>We can do that.

<v Speaker 1>I'd say thank you. Jesse P could not do any

<v Speaker 1>of this or that you. I will see you all

<v Speaker 1>next Wednesday. Have a great week, everybody. You're a weird guy. Hey,

<v Speaker 1>weird guy.