NCAA = Slavery You can't make this stuff up

#128
#128
FleeceItOut said:
This can all be solved with one simple solution. Allow them to declare for the draft straight out of high school for every sport.

If they succeed great, if they flame out then that’s on them.
Click to expand...

and if they flame out, they would come back and declare that they deserve free education AND the taxpayer would be on the hook for their unemployment benefits/food stamps/WIC/health care...you know the drill
 
#129
#129
05_never_again said:
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.
Click to expand...

The primary reason the NBA went to the 1 year out of high school requirement is how much easier it has made scouting. Having even one year of major college video on top 6 picks such as Kwame Brown, Eddy Curry, Darius Miles, Jonathan Bender and Martell Webster could have exposed the weaknesses in their games that lead to them being so poorly evaluated coming straight from high school. Having such average players drafted that high hurts the competitive balance of the league as the worst teams miss opportunities to improve. The one and done rule doesn't eliminate the possibility of busts of course, but it does reduce it among the top players selected.
 
#130
#130
This is news to me. I hadn’t heard that he was captured, chained up and sold to the Duke plantation against his own wishes. Forced to live in a hut and beaten if he didn’t get a double double.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#131
#131
bamawriter said:
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.
Click to expand...

And that still doesn’t cover many of the expenses I mentioned. Over their career they get tens of thousands of dollars in free merchandise, travel, hotels, dinners while away, and their monthly stipend.

Also, football and basketball money is used to support the other sports and their athletes.

1.5 years in an athletics department is enough time for me to swap from the pay to play side of the argument.

Regarding your point about giving them access to money for their likeness. You do realize that there are more student-athletes on campus than just the football and basketball stars, right? Your fix would make for a huge degree of disparity between sports and players which would lead to one hell of a mess. Student-athletes, both male and female, have to be on an even playing field.

Edit: I am only arguing from the University’s perspective. The NCAA has some issues, but I do not know how you fix that. I would suggest reinvesting their massive profits into all of their sports (which they might already do since I am not privy to its inner workings).
 
Last edited:
#132
#132
Bauce said:
NCAA revenues clear $1 billion in 2017, for the first time - SBNation.com

NCAA expenses were $103 million, they cleared $1B

It is similar to slavery in that you have a bunch of old white men making a killing of the backs of black people.

Cotton=$100 Million business black people=nothing
NCAA=$1B athletes=nothing

Easy to see when you think non linear
Click to expand...

I didn’t know black people were the only people that played sports or picked cotton. I’m trying to remember...who won the Heisman trophy this season and what color was he? Who won the Final Four’s MOP and what color was he?

In this case, Kanye was actually right for once saying slavery was a choice. I wish I had the choice to be enslaved playing high level college basketball or football. Sign me up as a grad transfer right now. I still have some eligibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
RDU VOL#14 said:
Well, my point is that this is a short term monetary fix if you’re going to do a d league. How many teams? How many players? Who grades you? Who pays you? A lot of these kids would never go to school if it weren’t for athletics. What if someone gets a career ending injury and has no other option but to go back to his crappy neighborhood working a terrible job with nothing to fall back on? Marcus Lattimore is a perfect example of this. If he had gone to a d league I doubt he’d be where he is now, with a degree coaching at South Carolina. There are too many players to have a farm system, not enough good coaches who will take massive pay cuts . Its not basketball or baseball, there are 22 people on the field every play, 28 if Dooley is coach. If you run just a 2 deep that’s half of the ESPN top 100 recruits. 6 teams is the top 300. I just don’t see it. Too many moving parts, that and nobody cares to watch the Fargo Woodchippers take on the Orlando Speed Passes for the Green Cup.
Click to expand...
Then he made his choice and has to deal with the repercussions
 
#134
#134
peaygolf said:
My original point......Take away athletic scholarships and make it like D3. Let them pay their on way,take out student loans, or get a job. Take away the free health insurance and meals as well. Make the athletes schedule their own classes and pay for their tutors. make them buy their own clothes (no free shirts, sweats, shorts, or shoes).

Then see how much crying there is!
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be any crying because NCAA basketball wouldn't have any NBA-caliber players in it anymore. The talent level would fall off a cliff
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#135
#135
NashVol11 said:
There wouldn't be any crying because NCAA basketball wouldn't have any NBA-caliber players in it anymore. The talent level would fall off a cliff
Click to expand...

Soooo, pulling 10 or so guys out of all of college basketball each year would cause it to collapse.......just checking to make sure I read your post correctly.........seems like this type of thinking is what put the NCAA in this mess in the first place......I say let them go, the game will go back to a team game again......
 
#136
#136
bamawriter said:
No, it didn't. Schools have been offering some form of incentives to student-athletes since at least the 1870s, and the NCAA formally defined the athletic scholarship in 1950.
Click to expand...

so why wouldn't there be any major sports? they would be there, but instead of being at the crazy level of 11/10 they might come back down to 7/10.
 
#137
#137
T-TownVol said:
Soooo, pulling 10 or so guys out of all of college basketball each year would cause it to collapse.......just checking to make sure I read your post correctly.........seems like this type of thinking is what put the NCAA in this mess in the first place......I say let them go, the game will go back to a team game again......
Click to expand...

Most of the top-100 guys can credibly claim to have an NBA future if things go well, and far more than that can make money elsewhere. If your choices are A) pay to go to school, facing awful competition, making no money and B) get paid to play in Europe or the D-League, facing better competition that will make you more likely to get drafted, 98% of the guys who receive monetary offers are taking them. It would make no sense to pay to play college basketball, at all. You'd just have the 2-stars who have no other choice.
 
#138
#138
We already have a "team game" that is D2 or D3 basketball, but no one watches it. Division I would become more like that, and then the schools and conferences would lose money as well.
 
#139
#139
05_never_again said:
Agreed. I'm not saying Manziel should have been paid millions or anything like that while he was in school. Also, the fact that he was an NFL flameout is totally irrelevant. I'm talking about his worth to A&M when he was a student-athlete there.

I agree that a ton of the value of a school's football team is wrapped up in the value of the brand. When Manziel stepped onto campus, he had nothing to do with creating the value of the existing brand, which he stepped into and was able to use for himself. Totally agree there.

However, it is inarguable that Manziel himself did a ton to raise the profile of the school in the short time he was there. A&M had record donations to the school (blew away previous annual donation records) and the football program has record revenues the two years he was there. That was not a coincidence. The school was able to fund the huge expansion/renovation of Kyle Field largely due to the increased revenue over the last several years, which, IMO, Manziel personally had a lot to do with bringing in.

In exchange for that, he was compensated roughly $55k. And not in cash, but in the form of room and board.

Manziel and other superstars (Cam Newton, Deshaun Watson, etc.) are unique cases and it is pretty easy to argue that they aren't fairly being compensated.

Players in non-revenue producing sports? Yes, they get a great deal. Marginal to average players in the revenue-producing sports? Yes, they get a good deal too. The superstars who become nationally-known and raise the profile of their entire universities? Not so much.

Also, your Peyton analogy is a bit off, IMO. Peyton is remembered by UT fans for what he did at UT. He's remembered by most of the country at large for what he did in the NFL. He became the marketing machine he did because of his exploits in the NFL.
Click to expand...

how do you want to address/calculate the value of the under the table payments? he got more than room and board.

as others have pointed out the real value of the NCAA is exposure. how does that get valued? the coaching beyond just a S&C?

then you have to add in anything else he had over his fellow students. fame, popularity, free tutors, easy classes, administration that looked out specifically for him. a lot of these stars also got into legal troubles that were ignored. Didn't Johnny get arrested a couple times? Don't know about Watson, but Newton definitely got into some legal trouble that other students would have been buried under. and most football players are getting that from the name of the university even if they aren't a star.

I also don't think we should be setting the rules based on the exceptions (super stars). its like me saying we should base their value on Dontavious Blair.
 
#141
#141
bamawriter said:
That one party receives minor benefit while all other parties receive major benefits is hardly "mutually beneficial."
Click to expand...

"minor" lol. I would have loved to have gotten those same benefits, and I don't have student loan debt. Ask someone who is in debt to see how minor those are to them. the university is a bigger system so in the absolute of course they are getting more out of the player than the player is. they are giving these kids life changing opportunities that extends beyond football. I would never minimize that to "minor"
 
#142
#142
bamawriter said:
Even using 1950 as the date that the NCAA formally created the "athletic scholarship" (and again, all they did was formalize what the schools had been doing for 70-80 years), the number of homes with televisions was still fairly small. There were regional broadcasts of certain games, but the first nationally televised game didn't occur until 1952.

So, no, hardly anyone watched football before scholarships came into the picture.
Click to expand...

uh yeah, TVs weren't around in the 1870s, thanks for that Sherlock.

people didn't travel to go see teams play? Even if it was just the local college? How does High school football ever survive without nationally televised games?
 
#143
#143
LouderVol said:
"minor" lol. I would have loved to have gotten those same benefits, and I don't have student loan debt. Ask someone who is in debt to see how minor those are to them. the university is a bigger system so in the absolute of course they are getting more out of the player than the player is. they are giving these kids life changing opportunities that extends beyond football. I would never minimize that to "minor"
Click to expand...

"You get a free education. I get millions upon millions of dollars. Everybody wins!"
 
#144
#144
LouderVol said:
uh yeah, TVs weren't around in the 1870s, thanks for that Sherlock.
Click to expand...

You asked. Don't get upset when I answere

people didn't travel to go see teams play?
Click to expand...

To the extent they do now? Of course not. Just like you noted about the advent of television, long-distance travel options were greatly limited prior to the middle of the last century. Of course, this is clearly reflected by the fact that college venues had much smaller capacities back-in-the-day.

How does High school football ever survive without nationally televised games?
Click to expand...

Because it's a completely different animal. I was on my public high school team, and we all had to pay fees to cover the program's various expenses (which, of course, were negligible compared to a major college). We all had to buy our own pads, cleats, etc. And the school doesn't have some mecca of a stadium, nor was the playing surface cared for to an extent beyond that which was required for basic safety.
 
Last edited:
#145
#145
bamawriter said:
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.
Click to expand...

Most/all the jersey's that UT sells don't have a name on them. do we just give the money to the most famous player to wear that jersey? 16 isn't taken at UT, but 14 is. I doubt too many fans have a jersey for Jancek or Sapp, but Eric Berry. but you can't that for sure.

a lot of the photos they sell aren't going to be of an individual. does Malone/any of the other guys get paid because they are in the frame with Jennings on the Dobb Nail Boot?

most fans don't care who it is in the photo. they aren't buying the photo because Jennings caught the ball. they are buying it because UT beat UGA.
 
#146
#146
LouderVol said:
I don't know enough about the other systems to say one way or the other. Do you?
Click to expand...

Technically, there is almost no chance this is the best system.

But to answer the spirit of your question, we could easily arrive at a better system if there were competition, IMO.

Think about it like this...the NCAA wanted to severely limit TV broadcasting. They could do and say whatever they wanted, even if it was the dumbest idea in the world and bad for their own interests. Why did they change? The threat of competition.

OU threatened to leave the NCAA and start their own league if they weren't granted the rights to broadcast games. The NCAA caved and has been raking in the $ ever since. They're ****ing idiots.

Another example, as I understand the history the NCAA wasn't interested in women's sports until a competing organization built up a women's college basketball league. Someone may have to correct those details. My Dad explained that to me a while back and not sure he had every detail right or that I remember everything right.

The NCAA's a bureaucracy that faces no realistic competition. Of course they haven't come up with the best system.
 
#147
#147
Bauce said:
NCAA revenues clear $1 billion in 2017, for the first time - SBNation.com

NCAA expenses were $103 million, they cleared $1B

It is similar to slavery in that you have a bunch of old white men making a killing of the backs of black people.

Cotton=$100 Million business black people=nothing
NCAA=$1B athletes=nothing

Easy to see when you think non linear
Click to expand...

lol.

they freely entered a contract with the school to play for them in exchange for whatever the scholarship covers.
 
#148
#148
LouderVol said:
Most/all the jersey's that UT sells don't have a name on them. do we just give the money to the most famous player to wear that jersey? 16 isn't taken at UT, but 14 is. I doubt too many fans have a jersey for Jancek or Sapp, but Eric Berry. but you can't that for sure.
Click to expand...

The "no-name rule" was instituted by the NCAA for this very reason. But, if it were to be pursued, I imagine a guy like Peyton Manning or Tim Tebow could win on the merits. It's how the players won the O'Bannon lawsuit despite a lack of names in the NCAA video games.

a lot of the photos they sell aren't going to be of an individual. does Malone/any of the other guys get paid because they are in the frame with Jennings on the Dobb Nail Boot?
Click to expand...

They certainly should.

most fans don't care who it is in the photo. they aren't buying the photo because Jennings caught the ball. they are buying it because UT beat UGA.
Click to expand...

UT beat UGA because Jennings caught the ball. If he'd dropped it, the photo wouldn't exist, much less be worth buying.
 
#150
#150
Off topic but I don’t see why anyone would care to get another person’s autograph, much less pay for it. Seems useless.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top