NCAA = Slavery You can't make this stuff up

This is still very much an NBA problem with these one and doners. Knowing that you have an NBA talented basketball player that is out of school before he is in, doesn't strike of tyranny and cruelty. Something by the way that was a common occurrence with "slavery."

Even more specifically, it is an NBPA problem. It's the union, not the league, that wants the age restriction that creates one-and-done.
 
It’s such a terrible analogy. Especially in her sons case. The NCAA rules are archaic and can be changed, but she needs to just keep her mouth shut . All she is doing is hurting Wendell.

Let see....
World class education worth $75 K a year, health insurance, some of the most skilled doctors in the world, room and board, team nutritionist and chefs everyday while on campus at your multi million dollar team common area, world class training facilities that are better than 95% of the teams in the NBA, maximum TV exposure to showcase your talents, private planes that take you all over the country and around the globe to play basketball. Not to mention the lifelong connections made with powerful people at Duke University. Sounds awful doesn’t it? Now he has the opportunity to go have an 8 figure salary by the time he is 19 years old.

So tired of people casually throwing around words like slavery, Nazi, holocaust or Hitler when describing something they don’t like or agree with. The NCAA needs to change some, but nobody makes these kids sign an LOI, they know what they’re signing up for.

Also, student-athletes DO get a monthly stipend. I used to be firmly in the “they need to be paid” camp, but working in college athletics has opened my eyes. They get plenty of benefits for playing sports for their university.
 
You're right.

The fact that the schools make millions off their efforts, names, and likenesses both during and after the kids are in school means that the kids should get paid.

And a lot of that money goes back into the student athletes.

Do you have any idea how expensive it is for a university to support a single student-athlete? There are hundreds of people that have to be employed as coaching staff, trainers, tutors, administrators, dietitians, etc. There are also expenses for gear, clothes, stipends, facilities, travel, etc.

People act like all the student-athletes get are tuition, room and board. That is simply false.

The big money sports also support smaller sports so that they have proper funding. The football and men’s basketball $$ are spread out.
 
And a lot of that money goes back into the student athletes.

Do you have any idea how expensive it is for a university to support a single student-athlete? There are hundreds of people that have to be employed as coaching staff, trainers, tutors, administrators, dietitians, etc. There are also expenses for gear, clothes, stipends, facilities, travel, etc.

People act like all the student-athletes get are tuition, room and board. That is simply false.

The big money sports also support smaller sports so that they have proper funding. The football and men’s basketball $$ are spread out.

I did the math on a thread once before. Room, board, tuition, salaries, and cost of attendance don't even total 25% of Alabama's yearly football revenue. And lest you think "Well, Alabama makes a lot," that number is less than what each SEC school makes just off the media rights package.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I did the math on a thread once before. Room, board, tuition, salaries, and cost of attendance don't even total 25% of Alabama's yearly football revenue. And lest you think "Well, Alabama makes a lot," that number is less than what each SEC school makes just off the media rights package.

So what’s your solution?

I’m genuinely curious.

Mine is simple. Let them bypass college if they so choose.
 
So what’s your solution?

Start with letting the kid utilize his name and likeness. If the risk of booster influence is too great, then don't let the kid operate independently. Let the school sell all the stuff and start an escrow fund that's payable when the kid's eligibility expires. They can continue to use his IP thereafter, but they have to pay him when they do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Start with letting the kids utilize their names and likenesses. If the risk of booster influence is too great, then don't let the kids operate independently. Let the school sell all the stuff and start an escrow fund that's payable when the kid's eligibility expires.

I think that could work.
 
I’m surprised some ex NFL Players or a huge Agency hasn’t created some sort of training camp where high school grads can attend instead of going to college.

A place where they can focus solely on honing there craft without being a “slave” to the NCAA.
 
I’m surprised some ex NFL Players or a huge Agency hasn’t created some sort of training camp where high school grads can attend instead of going to college.

A place where they can focus solely on honing there craft without being a “slave” to the NCAA.

Those places exist. But no NFL team in their right mind is going to spend a bunch of money on a kid who hasn't played a legit game in 3 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Those places exist. But no NFL team in their right mind is going to spend a bunch of money on a kid who hasn't played a legit game in 3 years.

It depends on who is running it. If they are highly respected I think the NFL would take a flyer. All it takes is for one stud to emerge and give it credibility.
 
Start with letting the kid utilize his name and likeness. If the risk of booster influence is too great, then don't let the kid operate independently. Let the school sell all the stuff and start an escrow fund that's payable when the kid's eligibility expires. They can continue to use his IP thereafter, but they have to pay him when they do.

At the very least, how about doing that and dropping the money into a fund to provide health insurance and career assistance to players for X amount of time if they complete eligibility?

The "slavery" argument is complete hyperbole, but it's at least slightly distasteful how easy it is for us to all wink at each other every signing day as 5 star athletes with no business in college routinely are welcomed with open arms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
It depends on who is running it. If they are highly respected I think the NFL would take a flyer. All it takes is for one stud to emerge and give it credibility.

I really don't get your point. It's one thing to say that the college structure is unfair, but your alternative is that these kids should pay to attend some kind of camp for three years?
 
At the very least, how about doing that and dropping the money into a fund to provide health insurance and career assistance to players for X amount of time if they complete eligibility?

The "slavery" argument is complete hyperbole, but it's at least slightly distasteful how easy it is for us to all wink at each other every signing day as 5 star athletes with no business in college routinely are welcomed with open arms.

Couldn't agree more.
 
The flip side of that is the people making $ off them and the people who love to watch them pay will realize they should have been properly compensated.

Yes, why shouldn't everybody get paid for things they are good enough to do professionally. If LL is profitable enough to pay players, go for it.

How exactly do they pay them and who decides what is fair compensation?
 
"When you remove all the bling and the bells and the sneakers and all that," she said, "you've paid for a child to come to your school to do what you wanted them to do for you, for free, and you made a lot of money when he did that, and you've got all these rules in place that say he cannot share in any of that. The only other time when labor does not get paid but yet someone else gets profits and the labor is black and the profit is white, is in slavery.


So, if they started giving more white players schollies what would the reaction be?

And Duke athletics isn't off the hook for free as she claims. The AD pays for that scholly.
 
I really don't get your point. It's one thing to say that the college structure is unfair, but your alternative is that these kids should pay to attend some kind of camp for three years?

It wasn’t my alternative. I said I’m surprised there weren’t already camps like that ran by ex NFL players and Agents.

If an agency ran one I would imagine the athletes wouldn’t have to pay while attending. They would pay by being represented by an agent from that particular camp when they got signed.

It’s a made up scenario. Calm down.
 
It wasn’t my alternative. I said I’m surprised there weren’t already camps like that ran by ex NFL players and Agents.

If an agency ran one I would imagine the athletes wouldn’t have to pay while attending. They would pay by being represented by an agent from that particular camp when they got signed.

It’s a made up scenario. Calm down.

Not upset, just confused.
 
How do they benefit?

Veteran NBA players (who have more clout within the union than young guys) benefit from a rule that disallows a greater number of high school kids to enter the draft, who would likely take roster spots from veterans.

It's just classic union behavior...unions aren't necessarily good for "the working man" as they claim. They are good for the folks (and usually only certain folks) who are already in the union.
 
Last edited:

VN Store



Back
Top