Recruiting Football Talk VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
#78,957
#78,957
orangejuice said:
The most Tennessee thing ever would be for him not to break the punting record….BVS engaged.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised they didnt punt a couple times on 1st down to let him break it in the reg season.

Heckuva a record though. That guy set the record in fewer games. How many did they play in a season back then? 8?
 
  • Like
Reactions: knoxvol52
#78,962
#78,962
Jack Burton said:
The NCAA did a masterful job for decades convincing fans that scholarships were enough value for the players. So much more money is flowing now that it’s criminal if these kids don’t get their earned share. It’s pretty un-American and for some reason people can compartmentalize this specific situation to justify them not being paid. It’s very weird.

I think they need a base salary system for all players at schools that can afford to be part of it. Then if a kid wants to opt out, they can, but will miss out on a portion for not playing.
Click to expand...
I don’t understand the idea that players are “entitled” to anything. People fill Neyland Stadium and buy ESPN packages because of the power T. It’s not that different from high school sports, just on a much larger scale because instead of thousands of small high schools in each state, you have a small number of larger flagship universities — so larger fan bases, etc. But high school kids aren’t “entitled” to be paid just because people like to come out on Friday nights and cheer for them. I don’t see why college football needs to be any different.

I’m not opposed to kids making money. If someone wants to start another pro/semi-pro league based on paying players, then knock yourself out. But it’s been tried, and it won’t work. Because at the end of the day, contrary to popular belief in sportswriter world, the value is actually not in the players, but in the schools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SmokinBob, dmwvol12, Enki_Amenra and 3 others
#78,963
#78,963
drylo said:
I don’t understand the idea that players are “entitled” to anything. People fill Neyland stadium and buy ESPN packages because f the power T. It’s not that different from high school sports, just on a much larger scale because instead of thousands of small high schools in each state, you have a small number of larger flagship universities — so larger fan bases, etc. But high school kids aren’t “entitled” to be paid just because people like to come out on Friday nights and cheer for them. I don’t see why college football needs to be any different.

I’m not opposed to kids making money. If someone wants to start another pro/semi-pro league based on paying players, then knock yourself out. But it’s been tried, and it won’t work. Because at the end of the day, contrary to popular belief in sportswriter world, the value is actually not in the players, but in the schools.
Click to expand...
You're saying the quality of the product on the field doesn't impact ticket sales at all?

I certainly wouldn't go watch a high school team play in Neyland just because it was in Neyland and the jersey said Tennessee.

If high schools were making biions of dollars of profit off high school football, the players absolutely should be entitled to a cut of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jack Burton
#78,965
#78,965
Orange_Crush said:
Yah, and the "no one ever forced them to play" argument doesn't understand free market ethics, law, etc...

No one ever forced people to buy Windows 95 and Microsoft Office, but Microsoft still got broken up.

If the suppliers/hirers are conspiring to set prices or cap salaries, then they are breaking the law. If McDonalds, Wendy's, Burger King, etc, all conspire to set the minimum price of a burger or the maximum dollar per hour, they are going down. But people rationalize an organization of universities that conspire toset the maximum salary for money-making athletes to zero. And it's actually the organized enforcement wing to prevent universities that WANT to pay athletes from doing so.

It's bizarre.

The Supreme Court's recent opinion basically told NCAA, "If your business model relies on setting market salaries of athletes to zero, you're in a world of hurt the next time I see you."
Click to expand...
Now do high school sports.
 
#78,967
#78,967
jave36 said:
I'm more pulling against Michigan. I'll never pull for Bama UGA UF. No matter what. But this year Michigan is just below UF, so I'm against them more than Bama.
Click to expand...
20240101_120452.gif
I'm about sick of seeing people try to justify a win for bama. However you word it, if you ain't saying "Go Blue" today, then you're saying "row tie".... and that ain't cool.


GO VOLS
 
  • Like
Reactions: drvenner, mykidturnedmeintoaVOL, VolsDoc81TX and 6 others
#78,970
#78,970
drylo said:
I don’t understand the idea that players are “entitled” to anything. People fill Neyland Stadium and buy ESPN packages because of the power T. It’s not that different from high school sports, just on a much larger scale because instead of thousands of small high schools in each state, you have a small number of larger flagship universities — so larger fan bases, etc. But high school kids aren’t “entitled” to be paid just because people like to come out on Friday nights and cheer for them. I don’t see why college football needs to be any different.

I’m not opposed to kids making money. If someone wants to start another pro/semi-pro league based on paying players, then knock yourself out. But it’s been tried, and it won’t work. Because at the end of the day, contrary to popular belief in sportswriter world, the value is actually not in the players, but in the schools.
Click to expand...

Neyland doesn’t get packed with 100k without the players. Without the players there’s no product to sell the networks. They are an integral part just like the NFL. College Football is more like the NFL than High School football at this point.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top