tv College Sports Governance Compensation CSPAN May 1, 2018 12:30pm-2:51pm EDT
welcome to the future sports. our conversations series where we take some of the biggest questions of the time at the intersection of sports and society. completely in line with the mission of the sports and society program which is to convene leaders, physical -- facilitate dialogue. this was hosted in january, on the future football where we asked the question of what if flag football was the standard way of playing football up until the high school level? in a number of leaders came together from a diversity of perspectives and we talked that through. this series is not so much about what should happen but what would happen. taking a conversation that is in the bloodstream already and really giving stakeholders leaders the opportunity to think it through.
it is really about looking into a crystal ball as best as we can. today's event is about college sports. it comes in the wake of last week's report from the commission on college basketball appointed by the ncaa and chaired by condoleezza rice. the commission was convened in the wake of federal bribery and fraud charges. prosecutors alleged hundreds of thousands of dollars were used to influence recruits on where to attend college. 10 people had been arrested including coaches at arizona, usc, auburn and oklahoma state. hall of fame coach rick pitino lost his job. imagine several recommendations. including getting rid of the one and done will in which players are essentially forced to go to college to make their way to the nba. also stronger penalties for coaches to violate ncaa rules. we are here today to explore the issue that the commission did not address. which is the financial value of ncaa athletes. many observers believe
widespread under the table playoffs occur because athletes simply have more value than the scholarship provides. meanwhile, the courts will be addressing these athletes conversation issues through the kessler case which is coming up this year. secretary rice did say in her post report comments that the legal picture as it becomes more clear, the ncaa should reconsider its treatment of college athletes name, images and likenesses for a term that you have a lot of take a full exposure hipper secretary rice is a trustee of the aspen institute. we were not consulted on her report.nor was she consulted in us selecting this program topic for shaping the content. we did invite her to participate as a speaker. she declined citing a schedule conflict. the ncaa, we also invited to send a representative and dave declined as well.
a couple of housekeeping items. there will be two panel say. some great conversations and then there are a lot of smart people in the room. we want to leave room for q&a. will have the opportunity to ask some questions. the panels will be concurrent. we will not take a break. if you need to get up and go to the bathroom or have a conversation please do so. be mindful of the cameras in the room. you can walk out this door are not signed or thought that one. it is on the record. conversation will be archived for future use.before we get started i would like to thank marilyn and michael in the front row who made this entire conversation series possible. they are the ones allowing us to ask his big questions. to go through this essentially scenario planning. we take these very difficult ideas that are out there but are promising and really think
them through. i want to thank you for making this series possible. to lead the conversation on what a college athlete, if they were allowed to receive outside income from sponsors, i would like to introduce our editorial -- john was a award-winning report that cbs sports for many years and before that with alabama.com in birmingham and he knows the topic inside and out. many of you have great respect for john. i do as well.that is why he is working with our program. i would like to bring john up to get us started. >> thank you, tom. [applause] thank you so much for being a today. i think is going to be thoughtful and enlightening discussion about reimagining athletes and sports. let me start quick with a show of hands. raise your hand if you think college athletes should be allowed to be paid by their
universities? okay. raise your hand if you think college athletes should be allowed to be paid from an outside sponsor of their own name and last okay. interesting. if you think the system is just fine as is and it establishes adequate compensation? okay. interesting responses. i ask this because are different definitions of what pain players actually means. and before the question also called jeffrey kessler case is essentially conflict free agency for players. colleges being able to pay them beyond the volume scholarship. when all of the sales, no! no steer that today we'll talk about a more limited form of model in which players can receive outside receive outside income.
speaking appearances, jersey sales and merchandise. to help you understand a little about this some key definitions. it is important some of the mean. the olympic model you will hear a lot about today. it is athletes making endorsement money from outside sources. for the longest time the olympics had very stringent and amateur rules that were similar to the ncaa. if you need money, you could not compete in games for the olympics evolved over times. now pro athletes are allowed to compete in the olympics and you have a lot of countries even paid bonuses for winning particular games and the olympics remember popular. another key term to know is name, image and likeness. also get referred to as nil. it is the right of an individual to control the commercial use of his or her identity. throughout this conversation, we will have a couple of assumptions were the only model
will mean here just to focus a little more. one of the athletes, they can conflict or individual endorsements. we could go out on their own and get endorsement money for they can pull things together collectively on his team, maybe have the university part of it is what business and that agents can business managers who represent athletes. they would need that to understand the legal complexities -- the complex issues and they were able to be able to represent them. we also assume that athletes would pay taxes on outside income and will sin that colleges will not be sharing dollars with athletes. why do you talk looking hundred model? a couple of reasons. one is that public sentiment is changing. can post get a survey in 2013 it says percent of americans
now support college athletes to earn money to merchandise sales. also many people in college sports believe that the omitted model would be the least disruptive approach if it were adopted. in other words theoretically, it will not cost the college in the amount of money and it might be able to alleviate any potential concerns with women's sports. also ncaa president recently said that the olympic model deserves serious consideration within the context of college sports. there is no doubt that many of the approximately 460,000 ncaa athletes over to get a pretty good deal. they get scholarships, they are allowed to access to quality education. and they're able to compete at a high level. we also know that college sports is a big business. right now, athletic directors salaries, coaching salaries, administrative salaries continue to rise.
it is controlled by football and basketball.and is controlled within five conferences.the so-called palestine which is the sec, acc, pac-12, big 12 and big ten. if you can get up there it is on the intercollegiate athletics. in 2005 two 2015, the combined revenues of those increased by 266 percent. it is important to know that some of these are seen more benefits from colleges such as through limited deals that they now provide from the student athlete assistance fund and there is no additional value of a college scholarship what is called cost of attendance siphons. we also know ethics has more value than was a lot to receive. translate ea sports publicly said that the ncaa rules alerted then they would allow cosplayers have the names in video games and pay them for it. it is why a notre dame women's
basketball player thanks to a waiver from the ncaa just appeared on dancing with the stars thanks to her newfound popularity from some game-winning shot at the final four. it is also why we continue to seek year after year, a lot of stories about football and basketball players getting paid under the table. what if athletes -- what would the implications in a number of areas athlete compensation, educational achievement, competitive impact, ncaa governance, women's sports, high school and youth sports and advantages. after today's session, we will receive an email with a survey that we hope will out. it will allow us to take a deeper dive into your site. it will be material and diffusing to help shape the conversation for how sports
leaders, athletes and policymakers in the future. today you'll join the conversation on twitter and you can follow us and use the # aspen sports lab. our first catalyst contention stage. we are pleased to have a diverse group of people.as people who are knowledgeable on the topic and people are in the world of college sports. >> i wasn't sure i was going to make that step.especially if john, the former georgetown and princeton basketball coach. he was a member of the commission basketball that just came out with recommendations last week with condoleezza rice. next to john with dan, the athletic director at clemson university. he is a recent college football player selection committee member. we also have andy schwartz. andy is a sports economist and
partner at -- chief strategist of the historical basketball league. thank you for being here. i want to start with some questions. 30 seconds right on the line we will start with you andy. what was your reaction to the commission report that came out last week and the recommendations? >> it struck me that there is a lot of other people to change their way of acting. and doubling down on ncaa. nba, change the way that you collectively bargain and we will enforce penalties more. >> what you think? >> i think they did a really good job and congratulations for being on the committee. it is a very complex question and a lot of issues around it. trying to centralize those in those areas where they can look to have some substantive change i think was positive. >> john, you are in the commission.
do you feel you all did a good job, did you draft everything want to? >> not everything. i think we slowly started to turn the ship in the right direction. there is a lot that was not addressed. a lot that has to be hashed out even more. i think coming out of it, the understanding and the cohesiveness between the ncaa, the nba, the players association with the understanding that we are talking about is a window from roughly 12 years old she 233 years old if you have a great career. it is important those entities work together instead of separate. understanding that the one and done role in the players association does affect intercollegiate athletics. you have to work together. i think we are moving in the right direction to request any asked andy down the line quickly. the commission did not address
nil payments. do you agree with this? >> i don't think that we, the people in the world should be having the ability to say yes or no. we have rights as americans and because of college athletes seems wrong. >> i don't believe so because i believe strongly in the collegiate model. amateurism and education are unique inside the united states as it relates college activity. no, those two things right now, amateurism and education other than rough. >> john. >> i think that time i think we should start having these discussions to figure out exactly what that would look like. or if there's a free open market, i do think that once regarding the road and not just this will go down that road. i think what we have lost in
the narrative is the value of education. it is just too easy to say about scholarships and then move on. i think we are teaching second that there is no value in your education. and i don't think that is a good thing as we go forward. i think it is time to start figuring out how it should work. >> john, the commission said there is uncertainty whether to address nil right now. if not for the legal issues right now and uncertainties, was there enough support right now on the panel to potentially do nil payments? >> because it was going on with the judicial system, we did not spend enough time to answer the question. i think the thought was, and i forget exactly how the doctor adjust is good i think exactly
what this can look like, we need to wait until the case gets passed through bequeathing the down that path. >> was too hypothetical. we need to hash this out. we are going to have all of the solutions. in a hypothetical world, the olympic model says players can make money off of their name. how do you think this could impact things? >> i think the illiterate model, the way it is, showed up on the screen there, it doesn't marry into education. and i think as long as we are a part of the university system and collegiate circumstance, you have to have that tether back and forth with education. whether there is analytic model to compensate student-athletes or not.i think whenever those discussions occur, as the court said, there is value to the education and a value that needs to be understood and
recognized as you move forward. >> john, the concern we often hear from people who say don't pay players and don't do the olympic model is the endorsements will not actually be what we see from the electrics. they say will not be the swimmer getting a legitimate sprite endorsement. and it is going to be boosters and alumni college together businesses and doing sort of a pay for play endorsement. is that what you think when it happened? >> 100 percent. not because it is necessarily wrong but if you go down the road it will be someone's job. asking someone already them to go out and solicit endorsement deals for players. there is one person that was speaking and so we like this idea, i don't want to paraphrase a strong but we like the idea of letting athletes use the name, image and
likeness. we don't want to turn this into a reporting tool. it will. it will, it will! i think if you go into this thinking that it wont, it is very -- >> will there be endorsement coordinators for lack of a better word? you hire everyone else for the athletic department. is that what would occur? because i think it would be certainly that opportunity within a program if we did go down the path. you have to be able to look to regulate it in some way, shape or form. the thing we worry about is that right now there's a lot of work and a lot of things happen over the last couple of years related to the balance that a student athlete has between their athletic endeavors and academic endeavors. all of the time management work that was done over the last couple of years. by doing this they would be injecting one third avenue which would be there time to create their endorsements. and you are about that because right now is very difficult for
them to deal with the time issues that they have right now. putting forward the opportunities to get endorsements. i do not know how many of the student athletes will actually be able to take up on that. but those would be additional time opportunities that could change the balance of the student athletes have with education and athletics. >> this impact recruiting? is it a bad thing if it does? i think you will see this use as a recruiting tool. but i think people miss that it is not likely to change outcomes in a substantive way. you will not see them suddenly it was capable players going to alabama because in all this endorsement money is waiting to get -- the talent goes where the schools are willing to spend the most on the program and to the extent to which the
money gets shifted from boosters giving rise to the school, she was just a reminder directly to athletes, it is still the same full of demand. >> john, it is a fair point. right now there already is best at the same schools most often and make the final four or must -- what would be different? if athletes were making money through their name? >> ,did you change anything. i don't think other than the athletes would be able to make the money off of their name and likeness. in terms of shifting the hierarchy. i do not think that will happen. i do not think that will alter anything. >> would it make a difference dan? >> all different changes that happen in the last 25 years, it really hasn't altered that competitive balance work and balance for the way some people look at it. i wouldn't think that this would either. >> for better or for worse, there would be a difference based on endorsements payments
based on locality. so, would there definitely be more alabama football players getting car commercials then say, vanderbilt football players, nashville and is there anything with that difference? >> i think you probably look at locker rooms across the country and clemson has fabulous facilities. and other schools don't. i think it will mirror that. it is idea that economists always get teased for making predictions that come wrong. in 1956, the very first was about whether or not free agency and basil would change competitive balance. and now 60 years later and, they wrote the paper and he was completely right. restrictions on earnings generally speaking, do not improve or hurt competitive balance. so vanderbilt has less revenue generation.if the bands, they
care less about the pulse of the endorsement of a left tackle will not have quite the same effect in tennessee as in alabama. then they will get less. i don't think it is bad. i think it is the same whether they have slightly less prestigious coaches, slightly less fancy lockers. >> right. anyone can jump in on this. when you think that these nil payments would occur for players?would it come in the recruiting process? or would it come after they have shown performance in college? >> in the current olympic model, how is it structured? when does katie ledecky get her money? >> she got money for winning a bunch of olympic medals. and she is left to still compete which is also leading to the definition of what is amateur? >> -- michael phelps might be a
better example because he chose to give up his amateurism. he is like an example of when talking about what it would look like because he could do advertisements whenever he wanted. then he received money for winning prizes as well. i think there may be some during the olympics itself, individual endorsements cannot compete against the olympic sponsor. outside of the olympic, there free to do what they want. and the reason she didn't do before she won is because -- >> i think your question would come into recruiting for later? i think the logic model and katie, she got her reward after performance. i think that is an important piece as well. >> but that will not happen. for some people that come out of the blue and produce, yes.
it will happen. but i think in my previous answer, it will become part of the recruiting process. and that left tackle, and high school right now will have the opportunity, he knows walking in the door that this is on the table for you. before you play one down a football. because we want you to come here. >> you can imagine, -- monetizing his youtube accounts. he has a lot of views in d1 colleges in terms of family people are watching. going to college next year. that -- in a world in which commercializing one image and likeness doesn't mean you can't get it college scholarship will for sure see people completely separate from that process using the image and likeness in high school.
>> you are referring to the recruiting process for you say will that become part of the court that the devon institution when you are recruiting a special athlete? i think the presumption is, will this be for uber athletes? and those are not think it will have some endorsements and in some institutions. it -- >> that is a reason why i think the emphasis is on the one and done. i went and looked. during that phase it was never more than 10 or nine at the most athletes that went directly from high school to the pros. even just looking at the set of adidas athletes that were named, is more than that. and so, the value proposition often times we hear, there is only two rounds of the nba draft with 60 athletes. only 30 people with anything at the collegiate level.
at the high school level, the value is far deeper than that. and one of the things we have not been answered yet is, he was going to commercialize the rights? assuming that athletes would just do it themselves. but there certainly is a model where clemson or georgetown wants to recruit nothing, they say here's what we think your rights are worth. we are going to make sure that you don't overextend yourself. we own the rights. we are giving an upfront payment and we're going to give you 25 percent of whatever the revenue that comes in. something like that. it would be a very different model. >> dan, do you think athletic departments would want to attach a name and trademarks to group licensing with athletes? i saw something said they wanted to be a new revenue source. and they may want to have some control over what advertisements are used, what products they are endorsing. on the other hand they could
say no, we really don't want to have any piece of this. you have the ability to make the money off of your name, image, likeness. >> i think that is the differentiator. whether the user marks or not. certainly all colleges have licensing departments and sponsorship deals with certain advertisers. one of the traps that would come forward with this is if your student athlete gets on the program and is advertising a competitor from one of your sponsors. there is confusion in the marketplace. i think somewhere down the line, there would have to be controls pulled together between the institution and the student athlete to be able to make sure that everyone is aligned and interest. >> would also have athletes that have endorsements that may conflict with the athletic department endorsements. you have a nike school what if watson, a great quarterback, he is in college and says, i am going to send it under armor.
i want to wear under armor products. what does that look like? >> that is a problem! i really believe that. [laughter] there is that other end of the educational spectrum of this. the scholarship and coaching and strength training. sports medicine, it is funded through a lot of those sponsorships. if you're going to run down his rocky road, you need to have some type of contract is probably the wrong word but, some kind of conditions with student athletes to say, this is the areas where the university has that right with these types of, whether it is apparel, shoes, soft drinks, etc. this is our domain. >> i would agree. and i would echo, if we go down this rocky road. you would have to carve out
separate categories that are nonnegotiable. for example in the nba everyone wears a nike uniform, nike warmers. but they can wear whatever shoes they want. ... there are ways pros sports leagues have figured this out. >> they mentioned contracts, a great work for what you would have when you're out recruiting an athlete. you offer him a scholarship which is a contract now and that offer would also include some negotiation over and il rights in the pros as an example as a plug to historical basketball league which is only performing. our goal is to say very much
like the aba which is that the league owns the rights to a league wide apparel to get every team and our league will wear which ever apparel company sponsors us. athletes will the right to choose their individual shoes and that revenue that they go out and get generally will be should something like 80% for the athletes and 20% for the leak. the contract that athletes would solve this hypothetical role once we get launched is effectively a division of rights between these of the things the school owns completely, you don't get pictures of the things you, other than maybe like emerald a moral clause, like a gecko and adores alcohol or something like that. go do what you want. there's a so in the middle where we're showing our assets. if you're in an ad and what use our logos you have to get approval and we will split it by some percentage. that would be a dimension of competition potentially. maybe sec schools could be 50,
maybe pack 12 school so what living on the west coast is more funds of 60-40. >> i want to get your thoughts of potential legal implications. the ncaa and the conferences entity to go to court. they're often getting dragged in, cost of attendance cases. the olympic market that were to occur how do they have to think through this of so they don't t dragged into court against regarding the antitrust violations? >> i have to be careful. i do work on knight jewels case so if jeff hears the same thing about the case i would get in trouble. -- knight jewels case. in general the real problem of the ncaa is not any particular rule that makes the fact that it controls 90% of the market. there are 351 division i schools. there are 130 fbs schools and they are all commonly making agreements. the simplest easiest way to
avoid antitrust problems is not to make a one-size-fits-all rule. dan rascher and i who rode the paper in 2000 suggested each conference made its own rule, you would have dependent on the sport, you would have a dozen competitive conferences that could balance off whatever needs there are for keeping a lid on things that people feel like if this gets out of hand we can't have that, , but at the same tie there's competition. if the big ten is too restrictive with this nil rules they will start to lose talent to the big 12 and things like that. the simplest way is not to have a blanket rule but rather say in units of one or 20 schools go make some rules. >> andy come you never been on an ncaa committee come have you? >> that's correct. [laughing] >> i'm willing to learn. >> that the wonderful idea of gosh, the ncaa right now is
grappling all grappling with the transfer issue between our student athletes and their 800 student athletes in the sport of men's basketball that transfer each and every year and it seems to be a real issue. they transfer by the way into the same system that they left even though they had the ability to leave at that point in time to go and play professionally but they value the collegian experience. my point in all that is that it is very difficult to move forward with these rules and coaches has been in this business as well as i have. the time spent on committees and moving forward with rules understanding and consensus is just quite different and not because it's a problem with the individual. the problem with having somebody disparate opinions and people looking out for the interest. this is classic hard request socialism is bad and why capitalism is good is because capitalism doesn't need
committees. >> john, you're going to say something? >> i think that there is in addressing a, of both of your comments, and understanding that how the ncaa goes about its business that makes those decisions needs to change and will change. i think that's one of the things coming out of the commission. there's an understanding that so much gets bogged down and lost and that has to change. you have to have an outside separate entity that can just make decisions so you're not swirling for years and years trying to calm the example used the transfer. so that change is coming. >> and that the valuable piece. i think out of all the things that came out of the rice commission, that might be the most valuable to the idea of taking an issue, putting
together inside folks from member schools, outside experts, people from very different backgrounds to attack a problem and bring those back to the ncaa and its memberships, i think is going to be one of the long-term benefits of what we think out of the rice committee. because we do think there's going to be a much, much quicker appetite for change. >> let's talk about women's sports, andy, you studied title ix. how should we think about title ix implications that there's an olympic model and the differences between individual endorsement or if it's group licensing with the university. >> title ix is a little complex and people often think of it as saying something along the lines of if you pay a meant $1 million yet find someone to pay her $1 million. that's not that's not the way it works. i will simplify it down for this which is what you have your male
female athletic ratio, went and looked at come something like 54% men and 46% women participating in college sports. then the financial assistance that you provide to athletes as a school has to be like plus or minus 1% of that to comply with the financial parts of title i, different from both the sexual fall parts but also even the participation parts. this is just the financial peace. we're planning to pay athletes paid up to $100,000 hundred thousand dollars you would vote the department of education and said to them we are a third-party, how is it going to affect the schools. the department of education, give us an is like you should assume if you're working with the school it's going to, title ix is going to kick in. we are budgeting for the partial payment to women. this nil regime with hard work the same way. it may be an open question whether if nike gives a meant ask auclair at a particular school $1 million dollars
endorsement, whether that's too far away from the school to be seen as kicking in but saint did, then almost certainly in this would talk about the schools were to wait a second, you are imposing something like a $900,000 cost on be that i'm going to have to give to my women athletes. as part of the, if you make a deal that has title ix applications, your sponsor has to agree to reimburse me. that means the athlete only gets 600,000 of the school gets 400,000 to cover the title ix, or there's a complementary payment on the side. that's the sort of thing, title ix is law and ncaa rules are just rules. and so the rules will have to adapt to the law, not vice versa. >> maybe i'm unclear, and this hypothetical scenario that we're discussing, the athlete would go on the own with her agent and
solicit outside endorsements, correct? >> they could, or the other way they do group licensing with the university. >> if they do that, i may be wrong, i'm not positive about title ix law, if they do that that's outside of the institution and there will be no title ix implications, i think. >> i would've thought this except when the department of education told us our summer league job that will just thank them to have a summer job said but because their college athletes you should assume. it would have to be tested. it strikes me -- but but i agre with you. as written you would think that has nothing to do with the school. >> andy, you have any thoughts? >> i'm not an attorney. sort not a title ix expert, but it seems to me that there is a correlation because they are college student athletes and this is coming forward because of their collegian experience. the fact they are on a men's
basketball team a a football tm or a women's softball team. so there's going to be some title ix implications. what those are i really don't know. >> for the group licensing you can easily imagine that the school would have group license and the primary generator of the like whole team at once would come for football, men's and maybe limits festival and maybe a couple of the sports. softball is getting more popular. but almost certainly the wise thing to do would be to have that group piece shared across all athletes. because that's school of money. it's no different than financial aid. the thing is title ix is thrown out as a problem more than its actual observed. very few of them, even if they do a job on the male to female ratio compared to the undergraduate thing, very few schools especially if the football meet the financial proportion now.
nothing happens because the department of education isn't enforcing and it and, of cours, someone to complain. you could go through out of the 130 fsb schools i i doubt to gt them comply, you want to at least stay close as the rule evolved. >> i want to ask about coaching. say you are a coach, college basketball coach and your players are making outside money. does that change anything for you as a coach, how you coach them? >> i'm not sure. i think that, we talk about the transfer, being able to transfer and play right away might affect coaching more so than if they're making outside income. i'm not sure how or if that would change. in asking the question how do you think you could possibly alter --
>> you wonder, this is what you may hear, you shouldn't pay players. does it become harder deal with some of the players? do they have more allegiance to the sponsor as opposed to the teen? team? is it more difficult for them to have academics, , sports and sponsorship, all at once? what to be different entities poling at the? >> dan mentioned earlier how much a time commitment is at this new particle to take him how much is a time commitment for endorsements? i think that's new. everything else you do with anyway. right now you did with are the more committed to themselves and the team and you can listen to the person at the barbershop chorus that whole dynamic unity with already. i don't think and may be wrong that adding, the pros, if you're getting paid you still have to be coached. i don't know that would affect how you go about the day-to-day coaching of your team.
in terms of the time constraints and time limit it would, could, could be a factor. >> i also want to talk about youth sports in high school sports. another potential implication. yet the aspen institute sports is a program, whatever big initiatives is project like what we reimagine youth sports through the corpus of health and occlusion. one thing we have seen when looking at sports is it screwed a lot of commercialization, sort of the chase for the college scholarship. there's a lot more money that parents pay. there's a lot more demands, there's the specialization in one sport and a lot of it turns out to be unhealthy. in a world where athletes can make the endorsement money in college, what kind of downstream impact do you all think that has on youth sports and high school sports? does to become a chase for endorsements, so to speak?
>> yes, , that will happen. because everything trickles down from the top. alan iversen -- what else -- a lot of people start racing there. kobe puts on the sleeve and every third person puts honestly. what happens at the nba level for the most part will trickle down. if you open up the door will little bellies mom and dad, little is 14, start to think because they're thinking now at the youth age how can i best prepare my child for the scholarship, this opportunity? that will eventually i think -- how i don't know but that will eventually also become part of the equation. >> i think you would be creating if we talk about little league parents and how difficult they could be to their young people and with those young people enjoyment of sport, throw a dollar into that and i think it
just creates incredible problems coming down the path for those young people if they go on. not only with her high school career but as a moving to college and they do for the rest of their life as well. that would be very difficult. >> the other thing is is that e somebody's athletes, players who do have a lot of value before the even enter college. you talk about zion williams and the instagram follower for some prominent high school basketball players. he's committed to duke, 1.5 million followers. sharif o'neill d committed from arizona, 1.1 million. 632,000. mac is going to georgetown, 526,000. according to influencer, these players could commit anywhere from $90, the $1400 per post on the one social media platform alone. andy, what you tell us athletes
who have value for even entering college? >> you are being exploited. i don't know. what you mean what do i tell them? >> why they can't be allowed to have a share of this money. >> the economic and is because the ncaa is an economic our delegates together and fixes prices so the profits flow from athletes to great people like this on the stage and the universities as a whole, and that to date the courts have not seen fit to break up that cartel. but i think it in some sense it stems from an idea that money is bad for some people, right. like think about all these horrible parents just if the other is my other will make them all worse. i think they i can if they are bad they are bad. i think if they are good very good. i don't know if this private
organizations of colleges job is to change how america parents. i would say though, look at a russian point of view, if you think like parents make bad decisions. they make bad decisions to spend a lot of money on a traveling came to try to get a scholarship and may not even be a profitable decision to the extent to which the scholarship is more valuable tips the balance being a slightly less irrational decision, or maybe all the way to being a rational decision. >> andy brought the cartel into it. >> just an economic term. >> and listening to the numbers, i'm sitting here thinking i need to get my followers up. [laughing] >> i will retweet you. >> what i said in my initial statement, i think there's times to have this discussion to figure what the future looks like. but i also think in a certain line of thinking you are placing
no value on education so that at georgetown university roughly scholarship, next year $72,000. over the course of the next years, 290 come something like that, that's real money. you are getting, we are devaluing education and saying that doesn't mean anything. you are getting an education and its teaching kids to place no value on education all when we see that means nothing. that means a lot. that doesn't answer the question, could a select few get more doing this, should we look at image and likeness? we should which is why we having this discourse you. but you can't say, by math is off, 290 means nothing because they're getting that.
that's tangible, that's real. that means something. >> that's just the tuition that is being paid to georgetown. that's up the cost of the other benefits they receive from conditioning to medical care, to academic advising, to how they travel, where they travel and all the other life experiences that go on to that. so it does have a multiplier effect for the student athletes. >> such as to be clear when a talk about exploitation, i'm not anyway saying that what the schools offer is zero, at all. i think college education are valuable and you can plug-in at something like four times the cost of attendance. that's the market price. the gap between one's market and what one gets. it some and works at a job anyone covering campanile make a dollar a day like in the depression and if there had been competition they would've gotten a three dollars a day, they didn't get nothing but they were exploited by two dollars.
just to be clue what i say cartel, nothing to do with drug cartels. >> i wasn't sure. >> i thought it was oil. >> a cartel in economic terms so that means a group of independent compass that come together and agree on common pricing like, for example, what a scholarship is. >> and you are correct, there are special athletes that, the same example to 82, 290, on, on their own could possibly make more, probably, could make more. but is the value of the number 12 men on the team is also getting that 290 worth -- he's making out. >> here's the argument i would make. why did you give him a full scholarship if he worth it? >> that's how the system is. >> you couldn't give them less. partials are allowed. >> not in a lot of sports.
>> you just can't show the. you could keep this money for the school and spend it somewhere else. >> that would be a walk on. >> that are max schools to get 50% scholarship in football because they don't want to get 100%. >> knighting ncaa division. >> yes. i told you we would have this argument. >> i said -- there's a thing called the counter will and accountable says if you get somebody in certain sports it get somebody a dollar a scholarship you can't share that scholarship with somebody else to get as media to give them a full scholarship but because athletes are worth it they did it. you will see in a few schools at the tail end of the value chain that athletes don't get full scholarship because they are not required. it's just that you can't share them. if you only get some effectiveness and scott ship you can think that 50% and give it to another person. >> let's move on. i want to open the floor to some questions for q&a. if you have a question, erasure hand, microphones will come down
to ask a question. please identify yourself as well. right over here. >> thank you. i'm with george mason university and a former journalist. i do research on college sports. first i want to emphasize that nobody is a licensed on someone's ability come in terms of somebody being good or bad. that depends on come we don't know, right? some want to say having said that, the system that the soccer leagues in britain used, that is being used in this country now in amateur leagues and stuff. that could be something we can look at as a way to sort of get young people to go into, there are college players who are playing in the summer in those leaks. they don't get paid much but at least it's the right direction
to become professionals. maybe something like that could be formed into different sports. i know it's difficult for football but in the different sports. i just wanted to share that. >> thank you. other questions. in the back. >> thanks for doing this. my name is michael. i was a sportswriter for method 20 years primary at the indianapolis star, covered a lot of college sports network in communications for labor union here in town. before as my question i want to put something to put in perspective. the ncaa will fight anything that they feel like lessens their power. mr. schwartz is correct, it's an economic cartel and anytime they feel like their, their power us that they will find a prime example is title ix pickett passed in 1972. they did recognize women's sports for another ten ten yead even after they did they kept fighting and fighting for
supplementation. it wasn't until the early 2000 when the department of civil right start to threaten to take away money from all the schools, not just athletic my academic money that they can be had. you hear a lot of talk about them throwing the southern title ix for recent date -- >> can you speak i just want to put that in perspective. what is so threatening about a kid going out and making outside money or being able to transfer without penalty? these are things that all students have the power to do if you're not in athletics. you said this is all about education. those are things that you can do that are part of the educational process. my son is enrolled student at indiana university who works at us are a to pay for his education but he can transfer and do whatever he wants on the outside. why is that so threatening to you all except maybe mr. schwarz to get these students the power
to do that? >> john, any thoughts? the basic economic fairness questioned if you're a normal student you can make money off her name, image and likeness. if you're an athlete there different set of rules. we often hear athletes should be integrated within the community but there's different set of rules is sort of what he's getting at. >> as i said, in the previous question you said were getting in the weeds a low bid. as ago ford will have to get into the weeds. you can't progress just throwing up surface topics. that's were at the end of the day would only end up in the same place but we have to hash out and go through the weeds. such a question, i repetitive, when you say repeat the inner part of that, i'm not athletes can what? >> on an athlete can go out and make money off their own value. natalie portman is a movie star and she made star wars while she was a college student.
was that a college athlete, if you have value can't -- >> that's why we're having this discussion. what gets lost in that is they are getting that $290,000. and so your son or daughter is working, i forget where you said, but these people, so that's the equation. i also said that it's time for this discussion to dig out we have to move forward. we can't get stuck. we can't get stuck, this is how it was then, this is how it should be. we are at that point with the ncaa, with the general public, with academia, with the sports world in general that we are at that point. now, you can't just make statements. yet to go for the details. >> right here in the front. >> andy, either question for you. the ncaa is a cartel, economic cartel. why i did not leading the charge
to go to create, to take advantage of the financial opportunity. that seems to be out there. based on just j. d. with these super athletes where there's another, this whole economic opportunity. >> i think that's a good question. a couple things can use fax it came out in public in court. clc which is now called img college, a licensee group that focuses on college figured there was $1 billion of lost individual name image and likeness or joint team individual name and like a silly thing left on the table. this was in 2004 that on team stuff the nfl and nba combine is equal to what the ncaa does on team stuff. on individual stuff that was basically one thing dollars ahead. individuals are not worth as much. five of them it is a lot of money. why did that on the table? well i think there are a couple
of reasons and one is that while i might grow, having 100% somewhat feels better than having 67% of a bigger pie because of things. where is this going to go? there might be recognition and might tip the other way. there's a concern with the unknown. there is an element of indoctrination. so like i never say the word student athlete but it's difficult to get some whose work within the ncaa cannot say it. they are trying to even a press conference is what you like to speak to the student athletes, things like that. there's a mindset i think that makes thinking like gosh, we can make more money, why do we do this? myles brand before you pass way was trying to do this. you literally want to get away to make more money. he just that but we can't share with the athletes. the schools stopped him and said look, if we go one step further and commercializing it will end up having to sherry. they chose rather than share to
just echo the. a great example is the ben buc. the ea video games. literally after that case come and give any case settled on that piece of it, this is great, now we can make the game and athletes were willing to make the game and the ncaa said you can't use our licenses if you're going to make the game. basically take the ball and go home. no one could play if it meant that had let everyone play. >> we will have to wrap up. we'll get to more questions in the second panel. i want to get a quick answer from you. if the olympic model happens, start with you, andy, who are what is the biggest winner works who are what is the biggest loser? >> school should be careful about a lot of the money not go to the main more. if it's too olympic model, schools with the big losers. much bigger than anything. so will potentially women. a world in which schools and athletes partner together is better enforced and were schools do better. >> i think as a go down this
road, this hypothetical road, i think there's opportunity for all enterprises to share in this and be able to come out better on the back end of it. >> i haven't studied it enough to be able to answer that, totally understand. it's an honest answer. i can see how women could lose out a lot, but i think it's important to go down this road to understand that we have to hash out everything, and that in all of this it shouldn't, whatever world we end up being, that the academic proponent is so important. so if you're making money off your own like this that's great but we still of these benchmarks and progress towards degree for the academic is still important. as we have the discussion it shouldn't alter that. >> thank you thank you very muc. this is a great panel. is give a round of applause for the first panel.
[applause] >> will bring our second panel to the stage now. [inaudible conversations] >> great. we will get started with the second pelvic pressure to all been here on this panel as well. let me introduce first to your immediate right is bernadette mcglade. bernadette is atlantic ten conference commissioner pitch is former women's basketball coach at georgia tech and i believe you are joining the men's
division i basketball? next is nigel hayes. he played in the g leak, the development league, a former wisconsin basketball star and he's a plaintiff in the lawsuit versus the ncaa and the conferences over athlete compensation. we also have gabe feldman, the chilean sports law program director and associate provost for ncaa compliance. like we did with the first panel, start with you and just want to go down the line quick 30 seconds. what did you think of the rice commission report and the recommendations? what did you make of it? >> it's a good start, good start to get the diverse group in the room. for those who are respecting fundamental shift in the ncaa model and the relationship between student athletes and universities. they are no doubt disappointed but there were some provocative and fairly bold suggestions in there. i will highlight one that has been talked about much, and that
there should be more involvement and early involvement from agents and agents should have a close relationship with student athletes. that is a shocking thing for anyone associate with college athletics or the ncaa to suggest, , and to make and at five, ten, 15, 50 years ago that was almost most taboo subject was the effort to get agents far away as possible from student athletes so i think that was an interesting provocative suggestion that will require more thought for us to get into the weeds but i think overall the suggestions are in the right direction but not enough if you're looking to provide a lot more for students. >> nigel, what did you think? >> i didn't directly read it. i was informed by yourself and listen to the other three, listening to you in one of the biggest things i guess let that was the in il and addressing paying athletes begin like you said, everything is a start. nothing can be perfect when she create, at least where the ncaa
is making plans to try make things better for all parties. >> bernadette, what did you think? >> actually i thought that the report was very well done. i thought the commission was a real powerhouse commission. i think there's a lot of credit to embark for appointing the commission that was outside of the ncaa jurisdiction to give as much independence and transparency as possible. i think that the commission was extremely diligent and very purposeful in exactly what they identified. at a think they also very open with, this is not just waving the wanted everything will be cured and intercollegiate athletics or with amateur athletics or the sport of basketball, but that it takes truly a team to be able to really delve into all the issues that are being faced very complicated issue and i think that the commission really open up and provided for a lot of
transparency. and now we will see a follow-up to the commission what you think would be critically important, that this report does not just sit on someone's desk that now the membership takes ownership for the recommendations. >> nigel point come nil wasn't addressed directly. in terms of recommendations. just click down the line, do you think college athletes should be allowed to make money. >> was yes. i start with the point of why shouldn't they be allowed to carry other individual in this country that has a right to the publicity right, and to the likeness. there must be some compelling reason to not allow it. the compelling reasons that been given in the past is to protect amateurs protect education. you can accomplish all those at the same time. i think you can allow student athletes to profit off of her name image and likeness will protect amateurs and protecting their education. >> niger, , i assume you believe they should? >> yes. [laughing] >> bernadette? >> i think the commission
addresses anyway identify all the legal issues that surround it right now and that maybe this was the exact time but i think we've heard unequivocally that there's an open is to be able to strategically look at the possibilities of what the use of name, image, and likeness for student athletes in amateurs setting, that's a topic that's going to really need a lot of discussion and a lot of work. >> there's an irony here, the lawsuit pending that gave the commission pause in terms of getting as recommendation on name image and license we keep referring to it as the kessler litigation. that was brought on by student athletes and we can't give them credit for the lawsuit. they referred refer to by the s name. >> as reported i always rode kessler. i think more people to me with
it that way. jenkins hasn't done ferryman interviews. it's a fair point. >> gabe, to bernadette . you have thought through this question. you rode a white paper in 2016 explaining one possible concept of what paying athletes would look like. you present to the nike commission and intercollegiate athletics. talk us through what the concept would look like and what does it do? >> the concept is similar to the main points you laid out earlier and it would allow for group licensing, allow for individual licensing. you could do a a deal as part f your university come as part of your team, as part of your conference but you could also go out to do your own individual deal. you wouldn't be able to use the logos of the university unless they allowed you but you that both opportunities. there would be strict regulations both in terms of how much time you spent on it to keep in my time management and concern, when you would be able
to do them, how much you would become a safe or to make sure as best as we can these are not abuses of the system, that you're being paid for your name, image, and likeness. i understand there's some overlap between the two. there would have to be control over agents. you would need agent representation editing this would have to be centralized and vetted so any third party wanted to enter in an endorsement deal with the student athletes would have to be vetted by some centralized body that would say we agree that you could have relationship with our student athlete because we think you are a legitimate organization, you have legitimate thinks of the student athlete to do or use their name, image, and likeness in legitimate ways and they can monitor how much compensation would be paid. this can be transparently would have to be centralized for the most parts we don't put too much burden on individual institutions. >> could his model work? >> i'm not going to wait in and
whether or not it would work or not. i will wait in i think your white paper was very well done. i had the opportunity to read the white paper and i think again it is, it's a document that provides for a tremendous amount of information, a tremendous amount of detail and a possible roadmap if this were to continue to get legs, so to speak to be able to happen. will it work, can't work? i don't know. i don't have a crystal ball but i think it's worthy of discussion and presentation and heavy consideration. >> dave, you rode in the paper that nal agreements have properly monitored regulated can enhance potentially and not detract from educational experts. can you explain what you mean by that? >> i think you can add an educational component to endorsement deals. i get laughed at this a lot when i say this but if a requirement of doing a speculation to reflection paper something that
would teach academic credit it could be used to help a student athlete who becomes a professional, have endorsement deals to understand what these deals are like to give them some financial literacy to better prepare them for the real world. just like we allow internships for all of our students, we provide academic component what they're doing real-world skills but tying it into the educational model. these can go hand-in-hand and enhanced each other, not to mention it could take a lot of pressure off of the student athlete in terms of financial needs. it could take pressure off the ncaa that continues to get attacked as long as they continue to have rules that are more restrictive than necessary. i don't think restricting the ability of student athletes to profit other name, image, and likeness is visited all the things they want to do. >> gabe, are there any legal concerns for the ncaa with your model was it comes to antitrust law, , labor law, tax law? are you creating a model where there are antitrust risk and
maybe they're going back with you can't afford it. >> there are absolute risks but when operating in a world whether or no risk. the ncaa is getting sued at the of the month whether its labor law, antitrust law, you fill in the blank law. they are in a minefield now i do think they're their openness io attack because the system is so restrictive. if you make it less restrictive, then it eases the attack and you can better defend the overall system. will the race potential antitrust issues, atomic issues? yes, but i think their way to try to modify the system to better protect it from those attacks and better defend it. one thing we know about sports and i think this is a theme that came out in the first panel is that the courts treat sports like the own little special entity, whether it's the ncaa, whether is based both of the antitrust exemption, that people look a sports to play than almost any other facet of society and often given special
treatment which means it's difficult to predict how these cases will come out. there is no guarantee any system will be fully protected. could it lead to some congressional exemption that would say we will change a model but we need to make sure we are exempt at least in some ways from legal attacks, , the maybe that's a solution. lots of service solutions. none are risk-free but the status quo is not risk-free. >> nigel, you're one of those who are suing the ncaa. what caused you to file a lawsuit? >> it was introduced to me by when my team eight at the time, zack, he just sought me out as a potential, like use the term athletic student. due to trajectory of me playing and generate a name for myself on the court and also being intelligent, to speak on these ideas of why we may be
compensated for efforts. it's something i thought and a long-term if it doesn't help me immediately it will help in nigel hayes double, use down the road. for me it was kind of a no-brainer to do those things and make life a little easier for the athletic students. >> college athletes typically don't put the foot and water like that. they don't want to take a stand like this. what kind of reaction did you get from the public and from your teammates and coaches? >> from the public it's pretty much either you're against it or you're not against it. in the social media air your a lot of people who say they will support you and say that you are spoiled or you have enough of an education. they teammates and the whole program, they supported me and had my back. the coach was on committees. he's always fighting for the rights for us as players to be able to be compensated for everything. again, is just something i think is necessary and i think it's something that could be
implemented without that much difficulty. again i'm not as intelligent on the loss of everything, like the other panelists but i just think it's something that can be implemented that whatever you do you can always start and grow it. you can ask the panel, everyone, maybe someone will say they are proud to be american. if they're allowed to change for the country i'm sure we can start with a little model and then we can amend it as we go because it won't be perfect from the beginning. so strong as we start somewhere we can always amend and make it better. >> when you in college wisconsin sold a t-shirt at the university bookstore with some famous words that you said at a press conference. with the stenographer, you started i think having fun with some of the words they sold it at the bookstore. they eventually pulled it. >> they did. >> what's that like when you see
words that you spoke that you made popular being sold and you're not getting a cut of it? >> it was a little bit of like wow, , really? kind of like very prideful moment but then immediately like the reason they pulled it was again me not being paid for what i literally said they put on a t-shirt. it wasn't even that cool, they just put words on a shirt and it was selling. i think that just shows again the difficulties that arise when not being able to compensate athletes for what the deal. i'm sure there are people who would've liked to have shirt. i know i spoke to people like i got one of the shirts before they stop selling them and their happy about it. i autographed the shirt so i i just think if we're allowed to do that, everyone benefits. i receive whatever cut if that happens, the school generates because people are going to the bookstore, they may buy that sure, they may buy something else. people are being, they're
getting a sense of happiness and joy by giving the shirt because they may like what i do on the basketball court and like what you do on the court. so i think all parties when if the system is supplemented or real out to be compensated. >> do you know how to get? >> they had to stop selling it. >> i thought they pulled because the concern about the appearance of athletes names images unlikeness. >> it was selling like hotcakes. people were lined up like a for him to get those things. it was causing too much trouble so they had to take them down. >> bernadette, i want to talk about competitive impact. you are a commission of conference that doesn't have football so you come from low that deposition, you don't have the money or the exposure or candidly the covenants by the comes with the ball in the ncaa. do you think the olympic model occurred there would be a difference in competitive impact, was it some schools in your conferences, your league compared to those in the power
five? >> i i would kind of agree with the first panel in that we've had changes in legislation and rules and permissible and more permissible rules for 30, 40, 50 years, and in the big picture the competitive balance really has not changed. but i think in terms of something how that would be a permitted would be critically important. i do think student athletes with her being recruited there looking at the institutions, look at the overall support for the institution, the academic curriculum of which were they're going, the geography, the location in the country to west coast, east coast, middle of the country. i think there's a lot of facets. i'm not so sure any one stroke are one decision would change the competitive balance. >> do you think competitive impact makes a difference? >> again, it's hard to see how it would have significant
difference, and it just seems like with most of the rules the rules only has to be enforced and restriction only has to be in place if it's going to provide benefits beyond cost of attendance to the student athlete. we don't worry about competitive balance when comes to facilities and coaching salaries and everything else we might give the school and if any. we even call them the power five and we don't have a power, and other sports leagues we don't separate them out by how much power they have. we recognize there are inherent benefits, advantages certain schools have. what does provide another advantage? yes, but as the think it's inconsistent. i don't think would have meaningful difference and i wouldn't disagree with what coach or clinton athletic director said. they said the windy any impact so i'm not going to disagree with that. >> bernadette, to the year some university presidents, conference commissioners have said if athletes were allowed to
play rick and pick up our ball and were going to create our own set of rules that allow athletes to be paid 50 think in this hypothetical work with that happen with olympic model? what with the sake of with a bee conferences are some schools like we just want to be part of this, we're going to have our own set of rules? >> i don't know if would happen in reality but i think that if a model a paper plate play were to come about, you've got to really take a hard look at the entire current model of which we work under, the amateur model. the scholarship at all what goes with the scholarship. no one talks about the question, well, that's fine if you want to go into compensate for student athletes and pay for play into scholarships go away. you basically pay-as-you-go. you pay for your tuition and you can earn whatever it is you can earn. you can get your endorsements within the papers tuition they
and to pay for academic tutoring and you pay for your study hall and equipment and your food. again if the whole system is undone and i think the reality is you have to address. >> nigel, what you think? >> i don't think you necessarily have to do away with all that. i think by being allowed to make money off your nfl, it helps people talk about competitive imbalance about being able to accept money from different entities or different companies. we want to sponsor as dan was talked about like a clinton, they had a tremendous quarterback won a national title. they have all this power, so for instance, a smaller school if they took majority or most other sponsorships that we're about to make money off our name, they
say you are top to recruit in the country we were to be this amount if you come here, as in accordance to what your scholarship, i think that would help because clinton doesn't need to do that. we are clemson, you want to come you are not? i do need to give you extra interest -- to incentivize you. i can make this much more lost it getting my education i can take care of my family and i think that shapes the balance from what we have. now you start to see more of these top highly recruited kids going to other schools and a think that helps that imbalance. >> i would add two other quick things. one is no one is arguing that chat baby or you have to get endorsement deals for them. it's just a chance to stop agreeing to not allow to happen. then they can make a decision on the weather it's an individual school or conference or whatever group you wanted to the dig site yes, we do want a we don't.
at the ncaa level not allowing it. the other is a question of if the system were losing and student athletes could be compensated either through a third-party which is what you're talking about are directly from the school that they would take the ball and go home and dewdrop at a division i and just give up college athletics. we had some of those arguments when cost of attendance was an issue and the schools would have to pay full costs and allow love school said no. go to do it and if we were forced do it or force competitive because others are doing get the we weren't able to participate in division i anymore. that's not happen. we've seen these goals are continuing to play, purchase because people want to get in division i and most of them are paying full cost of attendance. it's a question of how to find the money to deal with it but that's the beauty and part of the name, image, and likeness model is the monies not coming
from the scope is coming from third party. third parties that would otherwise pay the schools are paying the student athlete and that may be the case for some amount of money but don't think this'll be significant budgetary burgeon that a true pay for performance system. >> a couple years ago when you rode this one paper, what reaction did you get for people. >> everybody loved it and set it was the best thing to ever read. [laughing] much like today i think general agreement that this is a system that can work and certainly it was not the first, not the last to suggest this type of system. it's a system that fits with the collegiate model. i don't think it destroys the collegiate model. it enhances the collegiate model. it takes into account most of the concern the ncaa and people in the ncaa have stated. i do see a lot of reasons not to do it. i haven't heard any compelling reasons other than if we change the status quo it will destroy the system. i understand that fear.
i don't downplay people have those fears but i just down to whether those fears are actually legitimate. if you think about any significant changes made to sports, people say the change will destroy the sport whether it's free agency in baseball, baseball is fine. the other one were on the cusp of right now for decades and think it's peoples of the worst thing that could possibly happen in sports is that people gambled on sports. next you we may all be camera sports. something that was to happen one day becomes a a natural part of the system the next day and i think this could be part of it. more and more people pester to recognize that but this is not to suggest there will not be obstacles but there will not be difficulties, there will not be a lot of problems to solve but let's solve the problems. let's not just say we can't do because it's hard. >> what would be some of the biggest challenges do you think for the olympic model? what do you hear from schools about what obstacles would be? >> again, continuing to tie the
name, image, and likeness anti-to anti-to the educational mission is really critically important in terms of degrees. one thing i will say what gabe just mentioned the same thing happen with student athletes were allowed to work, all of a sudden the rules change the student athletes, they can go get a job, earn extra money and you can do whatever you want. i i might have a job that pays e $100 an hour. you might have a job that pays you $250 an hour. it didn't rock the world. it didn't. i think any time any type of the new model is introduced in terms of we often say the devil is in the details of how is it permitted. we feel than the model if you got the usoc, the government, the usoc that actually intimating that model and athletes cannot separate endorsements. the comment was made those endorsements they can't doing
that going to let the games. they can do before, they can do it after. you've got an overhaul of the big decision like this that really would change the economic model. >> nigel, , we talk a lot about the implications the college athletes could be paid but we haven't talked much about the implications if you're not paid. i'm thinking of increasingly in this activist movement in our society will players at some point rise up do you think it would be a day when we see college athletes say we are not taking the field can we going to boycott this game? >> yes, i think so especially the more information that is being readily available in the social media era with the research that has been done, the bigger numbers as numbers you read, 266% increase in the revenue. i think the players are realizing that i was ncaa is a business. that's why they have tv deals. that's why to do all the things they do.
that's why when i go into the ncaa tournament i have to have an ncaa cup that has to be facing and have to read the term the student athlete because it's all business, all things they need to do and all the money that is being made that the players are not receiving i think it would be a point where the players don't play. that's going to take the right player or take the right team and the right big-game setting and the timing is right, whether it's a national championship game or whether it's just a weekend game that nationally televised in prime time. something is going to happen and it will happen where players just go and strike in boycott. if you want to get something done, boycott it. >> do players talk about it? did you consider it at wisconsin? >> i i should have the idea, my senior year to sit up and boycott the syracuse game which for us is part of our big ten acc challenge.
i presented it to the guys as we had our goal that year and it would impact any of the goals because it's a non-week in which doesn't effectively. it's not an ncaa tournament so we can lose that. it doesn't hurt our record anyway because it's more like a four-foot type of thing that it is a loss. it's something i wanted to do. it was a nationally televised game on espn at eight or something like that. it caught a lot of attention, a lot of eyes. the whole team wasn't on board. so i made a decision the whole team is not there, that we wouldn't do it, but i'm sure that talks happening in many of the locker rooms and if it it will continue to happen until there's either one player of one team that finally has had enough and willing to make that change. >> curious, how many players do have on board? >> i started off in our team group chat and guys tested, and witnessing what they're doing during the day, but i told him
if one of the guys said no, then we wouldn't do it. one of our players said no, they didn't want to do that. they didn't feel comfortable with it. of course we are a team, family, brothers. so if one guys that covered with comfortable with it. >> what would your message be? that's always one of the interesting things if players were ever to boycott. you better understand what you're protesting, what you're fighting for. have you thought that out of what that message would've been? >> allowing us to generate that income again the nil as a set against the olympic model is one that is great, sounds wonderful. i think any athlete would be in poor because that allows them to get paid. it's one step closer to the perfect utopia of the ncaa and the players, but our stance and my stance, this since i have is to allow us to make that money
and get rid of the term impermissible benefit. i think getting rid of that term, it kind of washes the colleges hands of having to deal with title ix is something that's talked about where do we get the money from the paid players to purchase allowed to receive benefits an example i get is there's the nitty-gritty, so restaurant on the corner so they would like to give me free dinners because they say you play really well and i think it's something they should be allowed to do that. that's not physical money but it's something another player doesn't have to worry about because we've all heard athletes they didn't have enough money for food, they don't have enough money for this, that, et cetera. i think by doing that you have to worry about all the law type of issues that may arise from implementing such system. >> to be fair there are unlimited deals, athletics department can provide additional mr. athletes. but when you hear nigel talk about this boycott, is this
something commissioners and schools are fearful of? you all talk about this? >> we talk about all possibilities. we talk what everything that affects our programs, our conferences, our leaks, our games, our events, student-athlete welfare issues. everything is talked about and i would think behind every athletic directors discussion with the senior management team and conference commissioners we talked talk about all of those things. it's important to reset again talking about the collegiate model and there are choices. you don't as a student athlete you don't have to play in college. if you are a premier athlete you can go straight into the nba. you can go into the d league. we had that opportunity as far as any of the professional opportunities come use and olympic sports all the time whether it be tennis or golf or anything like that.
there are a lot of different models. once you are within an institution, i appreciate the fact you talked about your team, it never always is about one person, and you often have everybody contributes something. it might be something different that in step in greatness, and championships come in winning, and success here i think that's all part of this bottle that we're talking about when we talk about the ncaa student-athletes and teams. i begin to hate using the word compensation because the employer-employee relationship and how it changes the educational model which were dealing with now. >> gabe, i want to talk about women's sports -- nigel, quit. >> one of the point is going to say is you said there were other options but i don't think it's necessary to do those options. i was not, i could not go from a
high school to the in va. i think people complain now that they are tired of one and does because he don't like the lease or because it would like those players to stay. the two primary sports are football and men's basketball are seen as entertainment. it's not just college athletics. it's like entertainment. we give her money to be entertained to wind down and relax. so these two sports are entertainment. that's why it generates so much money. us being allowed to be paid we shouldn't have to go to those other options that are out there because again we're going there, providing the service that we are, except education we're doing and again as you say you mentioned kind into education. i agree. also you will hear me say i don't think that's necessary. you can go back to school. ..
in high school you don't even bring them to the ncaa. then you hear even more people become set because i enjoy college as entertainment. they are already upset with one and done. start eliminating these marquee players and these teams i think you are more where they become maybe we really enjoy, we love march madness. if you take away this one and done, i will be upset. [laughter] >> there is always the next class! >> we talked a little earlier about women's sports. i want to get your perspective on this. you have studied this relation. how should we think through this whether it is individual
endorsements or if there is a group license? >> i start by saying this is a hard analysis because one thing we know about title ix it was originally drafted they were not thinking of this system at the time. so we are trying to figure out how the old system would apply to a new type of model but through regulations interpretations since, i would find it difficult to believe that the department of education with a title ix applied to an individual debtor had no connection to the -- so if a student were to get endorsement under nike it would not fall under title ix. if they have a student or an athlete has a job with some local company, it does not get back into title ix. obviously i would defer to the department of education giving guys that might be inconsistent but i think it is pretty clear if it's a group licensing deal that comes through the institution to the university then it will be covered by title ix and therefore we get into the financial promise and
it will be proportional to the student athletes participating depending on their gender. so it could be one of the best things to happen to women's sports is considering that the men would have most of the value. i'm sure not all of it. but if the star quarterback or the star men's basketball player is getting $100,000 deal, you have to find another $100,000 not to get to one female student athlete but to give roughly to the female sports. you really have to divide in half. there's only 100,000 to give. 50 goes to the man and 52 the woman. plus or minus what percentage. but i do not think there is a clear answer as to what title ix would give in any of these. and it may be that if we do fundamentally change the system, need to fundamentally change the law. because as usual, it is about
79 steps behind reality. and we're trying to put new facts. it might be that there is a period of uncertainty and nigel put it best. we can change these things. it doesn't have to be the first step is the final step. obviously, title ix is a consideration. i do not think it is an obstacle, i think it is an opportunity. >> one thing i wonder is the women's athletes can get outside endorsements. is that improving the profile of women's sports? for example he mentioned katie ledecky. she recently went professional. she's electrical metal is for she turned professional and they end doors. and in all of its number ended up leaving early, and an olympic gold medalist gymnast wanted to go to silica data because she didn't go she could afford it.
so she needed the endorsement money to go appropriately. could a woman's explicit some of these nonrevenue sports, couldn't they gain by these hope -- high profile? >> i think certainly, dancing with the stars, ncaa waiver. anything that brings more attention, more branding, more opportunity is certainly beneficial and helpful i think. and on title ix the answer is probably pretty accurate that there is not a clear definition of whether or not title ix would kick in. however, it had one third party might not have title ix issues. however, if the infrastructure of the athletic department, the college and university was built so that it was negotiating the group that i think you would have the obligation under title ix. >> we showed earlier in the beginning about black americans feel that 89 percent believe college athletes should be paid
for use of their name. 60 percent white, the black congressional caucus has called to change the operating model. how does race shape the issue? >> i think i think race makes people uncomfortable. as it should because it is something that is to be addressed and the race impacts if not all, almost all facets of the way we do like. and the ncaa is no different. he said 89 percent -- i said as entertainment. when we turn on espn we not wanting women's softball or women's tennis. we are not watching men's fencing. we return those things on to have ourselves entertained after a night at work, we are turning on men's basketball games, or are we turning on football? the majority of the players in the sports are blocked. i think that i see how the race comes into play by the ncaa not allowing those to be
compensated as almost we can see it as we just don't want blacks to make money which would have black families make money as you show that, the money generated your name and with your family and that helps economic and inequalities of race as well. i see how that can correlate with one another and i think again, it is something that needs to be addressed because as we entertain ourselves with college sports, we are watching the majority of black people playing sports on television. that is why you see the number 89 percent. we know america, we're not all locked arms, kumbaya. i think that you see the number in disparity white versus almost 90 percent blacks. >> to bernadette!, you're getting access. you have the opportunity to get a degree. how much do you value that? isn't that a significant value? >> it is but i don't think we should be limited to that.
why limit ourselves to something that again, the american dream, to go forth and take everything you can. it is kind of how america was created. i don't see why we should stop with just education. we do value it. i graduated wisconsin. a finance degree. education is something that i value and i think is something that we should all value. we should not limit ourselves to that. i double and triple the money i was given by the college scholarship to madison for my four years. so, should just make that at the backend or should we just keep a tally and safe but if you don't cancel out and just take the scholarship and be happy that you made more? or athletes to generate revenue, do we then pay them off on the backend and say thank you very much, you generated money because for me, i went to college and i met numerous kids that said hey, i only came here because of you guys. so that is money coming into
the university, money coming into that city, deaf community, that state. just because i was there playing basketball. so, multiply that by all of the kids and the money you get. that we are helping to generate and create more money than just what my scholarship is worth. >> there's also question of what the actual educational opportunity that these athletes are getting. discussion with football and basketball. now they're spending 40+ hours per week in season and out of season that we are counting. there are plenty of academics can we talk about. what do student athletes get in return for playing? they get a meaningful education. they say maybe not everything -- will make sure they get a meaningful education. how is it not implicit? how is it not, what they should have been getting along is a meaningful education? then what can they get on top of that? they're not even getting a meaningful education then what are we even talking about? because then you can say is all about education. we know it is not.
and we know that student athletes can miss classes for competitions but we know that if you look at the northwestern situation, -- >> when you finish i'm sorry for interrupting. >> no, go ahead! >> is not about education. that is what they say. so they don't have to -- to avoid worker's compensation causes. we are not student athletes. i wanted to funnel for and i think next monday. to play a game on saturday. neither miss a whole week of school. which is okay. it is perfectly fine. but i had to write a letter and let them know i skipped class to do community service.that is illegal, did you know that? i did not know that. i'm just saying a judgment there, i lead to generate money for the ncaa and that is fine. i missed a week of classes. but i missed one class, a
summer class. to go to community service and that is an ncaa violation of which i was ineligible until i repealed and did everything i needed to do. ncaa is not about education at all. it is something you have to hop on his long as they can until the system breaks down and you have to allow players to be compensated. >> bernadette, that is a real issue, right? that the time demand and travel that the players have clear their studies shown that some football and basketball players services their spending 40 or 50 hours a week on their sport. whether it is training, travel and competition and meetings. >> i think the ncaa again, the ncaa are all of the college and universities, we make up the ncaa everything you can see the unbelievable funding that has gone on to the academics of
course, the tutors that travel with teams. the ability to be able to take the exams and make the classes and your degree, again, men's basketball student athletes across the country are graduating at higher rates than the undergraduate students at all colleges and universities because of the rules and all the progress. the degree is going, is paying dividends for the rest of just like the rest of our degrees could you look at that on the wall and it is something that will pay dividends the rest of your life. there's no getting around. it is funny, you talk about the sport of football. student athletes probably missed the least amount of class time in football. because of the football schedule the way it falls. basketball, men's and women's, sports a golf miss a lot of classes but i think the academic and athletic support there really trying to do work
and able to provide all the support services. that in fact, the student athletes to graduate for the ncaa does not take graduation, the clutch is and all the folks that are working in intercollegiate athletics. getting a degree and earning a degree is as important as the national championship. >> i think that -- sergeant york. i think of things you're supposed to do. going to come to school, play the sport and i want you to go. you should make it easier for me to be able to do the school. along with sports. i don't think that is something that the ncaa should be applauded for is a business decision. you playing your sport, if you need a tutor i can send a tutor with you. you need x number of credits are to stay on course. you need to stay on track.
so that staff is just what they do. i just think that it further helps the cause for why is a business and why we should be compensated for about three compensated for the efforts that we do. >> we are running low on time. i want to open up her some questions with q&a. if you have a question please raise your hand and will bring the microphone around. in the back. >> this is for nigel. what about an option? if you given an option to be able to sell your name and likeness to provide supplementation to pay for school, student services, pain for hospitalization or healthcare, etc.? you take the guaranteed money so to speak of a scholarship. what if you were given a choice? would that satisfy the issue? >> no. because it still plays a part
where we don't give choices in other aspects in our economy with capitalism the way we do. we don't do that with any other facet. ncaa is a business. i am an employee. i was an employee for the business so we don't give people the option. don't tell them they want this package or that package of payment?just be happy whatever you get. you take this, you get increases in this based on the accolades that you have. you get increases, recommendations. you can change jobs and start working right away. you can make money doing other things outside of the job. i don't think it is something that should be offered. you shouldn't give an ultimatum. i should get a choice. i shouldn't have to choose for the scholarship should be offered. then on top of that i should be able to receive what comes along with that. if i'm the 12 men on the bench and i don't get much done i'm so happy i'm here. i got an education and i'm doing all this.
if i'm the star i'm still getting my education. i graduated and i'm getting all of this for my hard work. i think it is something that should be -- we revere hard-working american. we safe you work harder you can get more himself if i am working harder and i'm better than you at the sport then i should be more compensated for that. >> any other questions? right here in the front.>> hi, jeff with interactivity foundation. i'm wondering what part of this issue and the problem relates to fundamental unwillingness to recognize this is a market. and we live in a market economy. all of the little jobs and hurdles seem to be trying to make water not flow down a hill. we live in a capitalist society and people have economic value, why not let them make that value? we do that with coaches. , the market for them is good.
i don't see the argument for trying to uphold the system that is fundamentally against our societies values. >> bernadette, do you have anything? >> not really. i think in all honesty, i mean, go into the market where it forces. and again, in an earlier panel someone asked about the question of a full scholarship. you don't have to give the basketball player a full scholarship. yet, every coach recruiting at the division i level believes there worth a full scholarship. and that is part of the value that they will bring. and that student athlete will get valued by the institution that they choose to attend. there is a symbiotic relationship between everybody's getting value. student athletes are coming into the program. a program is funded while and has nationally ranked schedule and a tradition of winning and
you put those forces together and then, this legacy of winning and tradition continues. i think that the market forces are going. i think even a lot of changes in the ncaa are because of the market forces. the additional cost of attendance. additional meal plans mentioned. ability for student athletes to work. these are the results of needs that have been defined. and changes that have been made. >> also, speaking on behalf of their argument is often made more generally, going back to what i said earlier, sports are different. sports need special conditions to exist. what does that mean? there needed for competitive balance measure not all of the best players go to the best teams are the best schools. hear how that is deemphasized in college sports. we are left with an idea of
amateurism. that the rules are necessary to protect amateurism. what does that mean? it is definition of that product and it differentiates it from pro sports. -- including their scholarship and the other exceptions that we make. but we draw a line and it has shifted over time as john pointed out. to the point where the seventh circuit has had recently said yes student at the decade through their scholarship. but we do not consider that pay. and the ninth circuit recognize that even paying them pennies above the cost of attendance, education expenses is a constantly what we have now. it would destroy the difference between college and professional sports. if the market works it will destroy the product and it will
also destroy nigel and every other student coming after him incentive or ability to focus on education because i guess they will be rolling around in the money and they will be able to -- >> right. >> that's what it is. >> and other question in the back. >> i have so many comments. i will be quick. nigel, i commend you. i organized seven different athletes for your special. >> my mother tells me that too, thank you. [laughter] >> i teach entrepreneurship and my student athletes struggle with launching a business because of restrictions. all they they say it is just a form, is not just a form. they cannot even launch a business. it has nothing to do with their performance on the field. he sports is coming. athletes are paid. nothing has been discussed
about that. the nca is a business. you mentioned it maybe 52 times. so why do we have unrelated business, why don't they have unrelated business income tax on the money they are earning and the last thing i can say about gambling is, the nfl owners want to only official staff, there's no reason the players cannot on their official stats. and make money off of their stats with other gambling entities. and before i leave, i cannot say enough, as a teacher of 30 years, a tutor does not replace me. >> all right. appreciate it. we are going to wrap up here. real quick, i want to do as we did in the first panel. go down the vine real quick and assume we do have this olympic model. and they can get paid up of name image and likeness from
outside parties. he is the biggest winner and who is the biggest loser? >> i think the biggest winner are the athletes and students will be able to make money off of their name, image, likeness like any other student on campus. i don't think there's a big loser. i think the ncaa wins as well because it better protects them in future litigation. i think everyone wins. >> nigel? >> i agree. everyone wins.there's more income more revenue. they just want a nine inch diameter round by instead of a eight inch round pipe to take a smaller size of it. which is still a pretty big piece. >> bernadette? >> i would say if the due diligence is done, i think it has to be decision everyone wins. it's important to leave the negotiating table where everyone wins. student athletes, institutions,
ncaa. >> let's give them a round of applause. thank you very much. [applause] to wrap up a couple of things, first thank you to make this conversation possible. [applause] thank you to our team and our assistance behind this. marty, raise your hand. he did a lot of tweeting today and help with logistics. andre was telling he went to wrap up with time. also emily in the back. really appreciate it. one more thing. just be looking for in your inbox that we will be getting a survey and please, fill it out and have additional thoughts. you can see the replay of this on our website.
[inaudible conversations] ♪ ♪ [music] >> live now at the white house, the breaking ring. the first one to be helps as a correspondence and on saturday. expect to hear from the press secretary, sarah sanders and the grieving is scheduled to start in a minute or two. though the briefings often start later than the announced time you're watching live coverage here on c-span2.
today. we spoke with the authors of the book shattered, inside hillary clinton's doomed campaign. which includes information about the former secretary of state 2016 presidential run. >> you are in the studio, washington dcp jonathan is the co-author of shattered, inside hillary clinton's doomed campaign. also joining us in new york, amy who is also a co-author of the book. thank you both for joining us this morning. >> thank you for having us. >> thank you for having us. >> jonathan, let's start with you. this book came up previously. your new information in it. particularly with his new information start when it comes to the campaign? >> personal leave new information that dates back around labor day before the end of the campaign. some of the warning signs issues get the democratic operatives who felt that there was not enough going on in the ground in the states. some operatives that felt there was not a good enough message from hillary clinton about the
economic plans. particularly how they would help people raise themselves up. how they would allow people to have a more aspirational view of their own economics. it starts got there but we actually went well past the election and some of the new material is about the fight for the democratic party. between the sanders and clanton factions. and sort of an intense scene in their with bill clinton talking to tom perez and giving instructions about what he wants to do with the dnc. which has not entirely worked out. >> just a revisit force in history. if there were the concerns within the campaign about how it was going, what was the response of hillary clinton team? >> i think they took it for granted at the time. essentially they thought they were winning. even on the days where, the not so good days. i think they still thought they
were winning. but i think particularly going into the final stretch of the campaign. in the final days of november, there was great optimism there that she would be elected president of the united states. >> and so, within the team there self, with a -- where there are those that said let's have a strategy for that? and if so how is that received? >> i don't think there was ever a time for the end of the campaign in particular where they thought they needed to adjust the message. i think at one point in time they felt like they wanted to end on a positive note and they tweaked it a little to hit donald trump a little harder. but i think that they felt like they had this and they were feeling good. i was there that night at the javits center. there was a sense of optimism and that she was going to take this all the way home and be elected. and that slowly turned as we all know as the evening went on. >> jonathan, this is a seasoned candidate that campaigns before for this position.
why didn't she catch these things before? >> was really is amazing the people she seemed to be struggling the most with in her 2016 campaign for the very people that formed the base of her 2008 campaign. which is to say, working-class white voters. particularly -- the folks that did not by what she was saying in 2016. i think amy and i, having talked to dozens and dozens of people that worked on the fencing campaign, came to the conclusion that what they were telling us was hillary clinton did not have a message for the american public that was what she was going to do for them. rather than -- it is not to say she did not have plans what she was going to do for them, she was not able to articulate that in a way that sounded like it was more about them than her. >> i will guess again, co-authors of the book shattered, inside hillary clinton's doomed campaign could now in paperback new information as our guest reference. if you like to ask questions is
202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8000 one for republicans. >> i think the democratic party still struggling to find out their identity and who they represent. i cover this every day for the hill. there is no party leader, there are people who want the president obama to come back into the picture, to play a bigger role. he has been resistant to that. he is been giving and behind the scenes but does not want to be the foremost figure in the democratic party. i think that he is, he also does not want to play the foil to president trump. he wants to take a step back and kind of let new leadership bubble up. the fact remains to be seen.
the race for 2020 is anybody's game at this point. there is no clear winner. i think a lot of people are still trying to figure out as i said before, what the core message of the party is. i think it is a better headline than anyone realizes to thank all of the oxygen is around president trump. i think the democratic party is still struggling. particularly on a national level. that is going to play out in the coming months and years to 2020. it is what we talked about in the book a little bit. >> jonathan, you hinted at this about tom perez. what is his mission trying to find this message to appeal to voters? >> i think first of all, he has been focused on fundraising and has not been doing a particularly good job. i think the party is not empowered so you have to look at the finance law and understand the war with the national party committee is different than it used to be.
this is not an organization that has the ability to pick candidates been affected often backfires. we've seen on the republican side some in the past. but they are doing better in terms of fundraising and coordination. the dnc is unpopular with its own base. half of the democratic party will roughly half of, they think that they are unfairly tipping the scales in the last presidential election. trying to get hillary clinton nominated. trying to do that with bernie sanders and really it is a clash between the two sides that has resumed. hostilities that had been put aside at the democratic convention in 2016 resumed demand that donald trump was elected. huge balance for the soul of the democratic party between the clanton type folks and sanders folks. and in the middle of that you have tom perez.
-- people are interested in 20 -- will find that it is interesting. certainly republicans find it interesting as well. >> jonathan, also besides this work a political reporter for abcnews. and amy senior political correspondent at the hill. we have calls on up about repair let's start with, new hampshire democrat line. nancy, good morning. >> hi there. i'm curious, during this i was in the 60s i've been around for a number of elections. i followed kelly's career. and everybody but my curiosity is, this campaign with the social media that took over the topics. nobody asked hillary clinton
the kind of questions you would normally ask the candidates. they did not ask her about foreign policy, they did not ask about her plan for the coal miners. they did not ask about policy issues. a lot of men did interviewing him not been disgraced as men as part of the #me too movement. they do not respect women. not only was social media against hillary. the porters cannot even call washington journal and support her. i do not understand how her policies never got discussed. everything was the server and benghazi. two things compared to everything that donald trump has said. it does not focus on negativity from his side of it and the horrible things that he has said. even as a reporter that was mocked. >> got it, do you want to start? ? i think part of it, politics plays a role in this. it is not just about policy. i think hillary clinton felt
like if she was the most prepared person which i was even going into the debates. john and i write about this extensively in the book. she felt like if she was, and she came in knowing policy in and out, she could win the debate and prove that she is the most capable person, the most experienced person to be in the oval office. this was not just about that. it was about a lot of things. i think one problem she faced was that her team did not come out ahead of this email situation. they waited months and months until the fall of that year to address it and have her issue an apology. they let the story dominate and over several months without even gaining control of the message. that was a problem and something john and i report. there was a lot of frustration building up inside the campaign. and bill clinton was frustrated they could not get their message across that the email
situation would come up the controversy was dominating the campaign. i think a lot of this led to her defeat. he was just better at, he was a little more nimble at playing to the media and calling into shows. something she eventually sought to do also but i think it was a little too late. >> mark in michigan, independent line. hi. >> i was disappointed in democrat and republican.you had trump taking -- [inaudible] >> you're breaking up, i apologize. jonathan, the idea of the messaging hillary clinton delivered on economics. was there something about that?
>> is interesting. he is talk about deficits and the debt. there was a huge effort on the clinton campaign support to find ways to pay for her program. something that they thought was very important. they would go until the voters about this and they would talk about spending and taxes. i think they believe it was the responsible thing to do and voters would respond to it. in the end it didn't matter at all. what we saw was president trump campaigning on policies that were clearly going to expand the deficit. then implement policies with the last tax cut and big spending bridge that we just got more recently that exacerbates the deficit.right now we're looking at $1 trillion deficits. the american voters did not prioritize that as their number one idea coming into the election. by the way, they have not done that for a long time!
you know there was complain about deficits and debt. and the npower party almost always exacerbates that.the exception to that is george h. w. bush. he did love that was meant to rain and deficit. bill clinton, some budgets were also intended to cut distemper largely speaking over the last 40 years or so, is the party in power that makes that worse. westly james, boston, massachusetts. the credit line. >> good morning to all three of you. let's make this fast and simple. nobody likes kelly. it is not the deficit policy, i don't know what that is. she came up to the wrong people. she came up white people. don't get wrong. white people got it. but her husband came out for the minorities and she did not. she wanted the white people. she assumed she would get it because mcb is a democrat. when you come off like that we don't come out and vote. that is her campaigns for. she deserved to lose.
look at who got as her placement. >> james in massachusetts. her appeal to minorities? >> i think she tried to emanate president obama is a strategy in a lot of ways. she felt like if she actually went into cities and spoke to minorities, i think that was part of her strategy, actually. a lot of people say and what about the base? what about the people that voted for your husband? they are the people who will come out and support you. i think a lot of people felt that she was ignoring those people. the working-class people. as we saw commission and went back to wisconsin. obviously they supported her before, supported her husband. blue-collar states like michigan. she had a problem in the primaries. she never really sought to fix that. i think she did try but it didn't work out. i think her strategy here was completely on this. i think what she was trying to
do is fight the last war. report extensively in the book, she did not have her on strategy about how to pull these people together and bring the party together. particularly after the primary. where a lot of bernie sanders supporters, 11 millennialist did not feel the need to come out and support her. >> mr. allen? >> before the west virginia primary 2008 she basically said, i am paraphrasing but basically she said we are going to west virginia because of white people. i'm not sure that everyone forgot that. in 2016 she targeted her message very much to minority voters particularly in the primaries. the way women, wishing it appeared by the tension into the general election, she had and alienated some of the white working-class voters that were part of her base in 2008. and it is a minority voters remembered what she was talking about in 2008. they weren't all that excited about what they were hearing. she had issues with
african-american turnout from the big swing states and president trump was able to win enough of a share of minority voters obviously to win the electoral college. >> we have john in michigan. >> hi there. i think the two biggest things that got hilarious campaign, will cause it to fail, when she was actually honest a couple of times and called donald charles voters deplorable. and that she would call minors out of business and left about it. she destroyed herself by doing those two things. they have tom perez right now at the dnc who came out nationally said, to not be pro-life and be a democrat and dick durbin, confirming what he said. the dnc and the democratic party have a major problem. they have got to start communicating better with
people and thetruth.thatismycomment. >> iwillletbothofyouwrongwit hthat. >> isnotoftenapartyisadvised toquittellingthetruth. but youknowithink hemakesagoodpointthathill aryclintonappeared to giveusawindowintorethinki ngthoseepisodes. thetruthis, we'renotprobablyasasociet ygoingtostartopeningupalo tmorecalmwind inthenextfive,10or15years .ithinkyoumoreabouttheway shesaidit.ithinkit'smorea bout