Please tell me Sampson is NOT leaving us !

#102
#102
Voltopia said:
Why worry about it? Everyone's replaceable now. If anyone leaves these days, they'll just bring in someone else from the portal.

I genuinely don't get why anyone should worry about it anymore.
Click to expand...

Agree, and the player left, rarely do they change their minds, that NIL money is hard to turn down if your chances to go to the NFL are slim.
 
#103
#103
VolMarine1371 said:
Youā€™re not getting what Iā€™m saying. The NCAA needs to put regulations in place. The NCAA can change the guidelines and say if you receive x amount, then youā€™re ineligible for scholarship, but still eligible to play. The school wouldnā€™t be setting the guidelines, the guidelines would be set by the NCAA.

Or the NCAA could say you can only draw NIL money, or scholarship money, but not both, regardless who is paying it out.
Click to expand...

What youā€™re proposing is literally against the law.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77, VolDave53, SayUWantAreVOLution and 1 other person
#104
#104
Woke said:
Itā€™s a hot mess no doubt but idk the solutions are as cut and dried as some think.

For example scholarship $$ are paid by the school and are what tie the athletes to the school under specific rules. You know the whole pesky inconvenient college student athlete go to class thing.

NIL $$ are private and paid via outside donors. Under NIL alone even if somehow it was legal to force players to ā€œpayā€ for their own scholarships all youā€™d have is a bunch of paid free agents with no ties to the school or school rules with no monitored class attendance free study halls etc.

ā€œRegularā€ students who donā€™t get athletic scholarships and pay their own way arenā€™t bound by any of these restrictions bc they donā€™t act as agents of the schools.

Maybe there are obvious workarounds to all of this but I think the real solution somehow lies in setting ā€œ$$ capsā€ on each position that every school has to follow. But mercenary coaches and NIL donors would probably still find work arounds.

Money corrupts. And unregulated $$ corrupt absolutely.
Click to expand...

Why should an individualā€™s earning potential in a free market ever have a cap on it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cbateman7606, TennesseeTarheel and VolDave53
#106
#106
GiveHim6InSC said:
I probably would have taken it.
Had the NIL money covered my tuition, room/board, books, etc, I would have gladly given my scholarship to another player who busted his tail to help our team but was not on scholarship. There are many such players out there.
Had I been making what some of these players are, I wouldnā€™t miss the money.
Like I said, itā€™s a sign of the times.
Click to expand...

A D1 scholarship now includes health care coverage both during playing career and for a period of time after eligibility is exhausted. I don't know (don't think) walk ons get the same coverage so that is a huge benefit of being on scholarship most wouldn't give up to help a teammate.
 
#109
#109
VolMarine1371 said:
Youā€™re not getting what Iā€™m saying. The NCAA needs to put regulations in place. The NCAA can change the guidelines and say if you receive x amount, then youā€™re ineligible for scholarship, but still eligible to play. The school wouldnā€™t be setting the guidelines, the guidelines would be set by the NCAA.

Or the NCAA could say you can only draw NIL money, or scholarship money, but not both, regardless who is paying it out.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, that's not what you'd allow your employers to tell you. Imagine if one of your employers said, "if you earn over XXX EVEN IF IT'S NOT FROM US, you're not eligible for benefits from us."

Let me put it like this. General Jim "Mad Dog" Mattis is reported to be a millionaire. Can the DoD come to him, if he's enrolled, and tell him, "You're rich enough to afford your own insurance, so no Tricare is available for you." No. He EARNED that benefit. That would be terrible.

These young people have EARNED their scholarships AND they're earning money. WTF. They're living the American success we WANT people to have.

Restricting benefits is what got the NCAA the 9-0 Alston vs NCAA Supreme Court loss. It's wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and VolDave53
#110
#110
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
Respectfully, that's not what you'd allow your employers to tell you. Imagine if one of your employers said, "if you earn over XXX EVEN IF IT'S NOT FROM US, you're not eligible for benefits from us."

Let me put it like this. General Jim "Mad Dog" Mattis is reported to be a millionaire. Can the DoD come to him, if he's enrolled, and tell him, "You're rich enough to afford your own insurance, so no Tricare is available for you." No. He EARNED that benefit. That would be terrible.

These young people have EARNED their scholarships AND they're earning money. WTF. They're living the American success we WANT people to have.

Restricting benefits is what got the NCAA the 9-0 Alston vs NCAA Supreme Court loss. It's wrong.
Click to expand...

Silly manā€¦

General Mattis is not a disgruntled 5* athlete considering a transfer from Knoxville to Tuscaloosa because of limited playing time and more lucrative NIL opportunities.

We canā€™t have these kids getting the fan base all upset by leaving and whatnot.

These athletes must be punished and kept under controlā€¦you know, for the fansā€™ sake.

Otis from Ooltewah deserves better.

Edited for @Voltopia so heā€™s not confused. šŸ˜‚
 
Last edited:
#111
#111
VolMarine1371 said:
I am all for the free market. But NFL and the NBA have salary caps. Each employer has a max salary they are going to pay. No one is stopping anyone from making money. But NIL needs to be looked at like the NFL looks at free agency. If you donā€™t cap the players, then cap the universitys. Make them manage a college team, like the NFL manages its team. Let the NCAA give the FBS schools a cap number and tell them they have to stay under that. And let the schools control the NIL going forward.
Click to expand...
That's the "players are employees" lawsuit and situation which really is bad for college athletics.

If football players are declared pro employees and treated as such, what about the track team or tennis team? Do they put in less work? Do they not represent the school? Etc, etc. They should be paid too, legally, if "school athletes are employees of the school." The court isn't going to go down a list and say, "Football, yes. Tennis, no. Basketball, yes. Wrestling, no......"

Schools end up either dropping a lot of sports they don't want to pay or getting out of athletics completely. Smaller schools will be completely unable to afford sports.

It's not good for any of us when the Court eventually rules "athletes are employees of the school."
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolMarine1371, Snapper58 and Voltopia
#112
#112
VolMarine1371 said:
Union or non union, I am for whatever is best for the University, NCAA and the player. Thereā€™s actually a lawsuit now brought by former players wanting to unionize, or debate whether they are paid employees and of the university. What we are seeing is just the tip of the ice burg. Thereā€™s going to be more come from all this when the dust settles, and the NCAA deals with all these lawsuits.

Remember, it was lawsuits that made the ncaa change their minds about players making money. We all know it was never meant to be ā€œpay for playā€ type stuff, but thatā€™s exactly what it is and the NCAA knows it and they are scared to touch it fearing another lawsuit.
Click to expand...
If they unionize that means they become employees of the schools. And that means the courts will eventually rule that 50% of all the money has to go to womenā€™s sports under Title IX. You wonā€™t be able to spend it all on football and menā€™s basketball.
 
#113
#113
SGMVols said:
If they unionize that means they become employees of the schools. And that means the courts will eventually rule that 50% of all the money has to go to womenā€™s sports under Title IX. You wonā€™t be able to spend it all on football and menā€™s basketball.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't making them employees be the end of title IX? I don't think it covers employees.
 
#114
#114
A player can do this every year. Threaten to leave unless their NIL deal isnā€™t increased. Itā€™s why Iā€™m in favor of taking portal players. They canā€™t threaten this.
 
#115
#115
hog88 said:
Wouldn't making them employees be the end of title IX? I don't think it covers employees.
Click to expand...
Unless you totally remove the requirement that players also be students at the school theyā€™re representing, I would assume Title IX still applies. At least until the court system rules on it.
 
#116
#116
rickyyrs said:
I think Tennessee did not use Sampson enough. They could of threw him some swing passes out of backfield. He is like Alvin Kamara. Who Butch Jones did not know how to use either.
Click to expand...
May be true, but next year he will get all the touches he can handle.
 
#117
#117
Lawrence Wright said:
These athletes must be punished and kept under controlā€¦you know, for the fansā€™ sake.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, "control," because being a student-athlete was sooooo oppressive.

Why did players keep agreeing to play colleges for a hundred years if it was so awful?
 
#120
#120
Lawrence Wright said:
Nice strawmanā€¦or misinterpretation.

Either way, please excuse me while I move the goalpost back to the end zone.
Click to expand...

You said the athletes must be "kept under control" for the sake of others, and the tone implied a negative condition. The first defintion of oppression "is the state of being subject to unjust treatment or control." I don't see very much straw.
 
#122
#122
Voltopia said:
You said the athletes must be "kept under control" for the sake of others, and the tone implied a negative condition. The first defintion of oppression "is the state of being subject to unjust treatment or control." I don't see very much straw.
Click to expand...

So it was a misinterpretationā€¦very well then.

The athletes are simply playing a game now under new rules that benefit them more than the fansā€¦and some fans canā€™t handle it.

The old rules were deemed unconstitutional by the highest court in the landā€¦and yet some fans still canā€™t handle it.
 
#123
#123
Voltopia said:
Oh yes, "control," because being a student-athlete was sooooo oppressive.

Why did players keep agreeing to play colleges for a hundred years if it was so awful?
Click to expand...
In part because schools started having boosters pay them.

In part because the pro league stopped taking players right out of high school and college was pretty much the only choice (and likely the best paying choice until the pros.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia
#124
#124
SayUWantAreVOLution said:
In part because schools started having boosters pay them.

In part because the pro league stopped taking players right out of high school and college was pretty much the only choice (and likely the best paying choice until the pros.)
Click to expand...

Only the NFL doesn't take players out of HS. Even when the NBA went to the 1 year removed rule basketball players had other options.
 
#125
#125
Lawrence Wright said:
So it was a misinterpretationā€¦very well then.

The athletes are simply playing a game now under new rules that benefit them more than the fansā€¦and some fans canā€™t handle it.

The old rules were deemed unconstitutional by the highest court in the landā€¦and yet some fans still canā€™t handle it.
Click to expand...

You said the athletes must be kept under control. You - not me - wrote the word control and implied, rather overtly, that the players were being controlled in some way for the benefit of others.

I didn't misinterpet anything. I'm poking at how strongly negative you implied that strucutre of the previous hundred years of college sports to be, as evidenced by your using the word control. Which is why I asked, albeit rhetorically, about the motivations that would drive them to accept such an arrangement for so long if it was so oppressive - a word I used because the very defintion of oppression is being subject to control.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top