Supreme Court agrees to hear NCAA athlete compensation case

#53
#53
Yea, he made the break thru with a dynamic QB. That can overcome alot, see the Dobbs effect at UT.

It's a talent deal now. Butch Jones could coach that Clemson team to a playoff appearance. It would be difficult to find a coach that couldnt.
Dobbs was good. Certainly not dynamic. Dynamic QBs aren't 3rd string in the NFL
 
#59
#59
You do accept they players are purchased?

To a degree yes, I have zero doubts in my mind that Saban's little helpers step in to lend a hand when the recruiting battle is close. I also fully believe that they Stretch Armstrong the rule book for players in the system, seems like all of them drive nice cars. But I do think that happens at all SEC schools minus Vandy, it's just on a much larger scale at Bama.

I also think all of the cheating in the world wouldn't produce what Saban has done without a quality staff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: USAFgolferVol
#64
#64
To a degree yes, I have zero doubts in my mind that Saban's little helpers step in to lend a hand when the recruiting battle is close. I also fully believe that they Stretch Armstrong the rule book for players in the system, seems like all of them drive nice cars. But I do think that happens at all SEC schools minus Vandy, it's just on a much larger scale at Bama.

I also think all of the cheating in the world wouldn't produce what Saban has done without a quality staff.

Fill UT recruiting classes with 4 and 5 stars and you just need competent coaching to compete with Bama. This idea that Saban has this unprecedented ability to always find great assistants isnt realistic. The fact these assistants get to coach the best talent around is realistic and factual.
 
#65
#65
Manziel was a head case and pissed away his opportunities. He'd probably still be in the NFL if he wasn't an addict.

No he wouldnt. He was dynamic at A&M but never had the physical tools to make it in the NFL.
 
#68
#68
Fill UT recruiting classes with 4 and 5 stars and you just need competent coaching to compete with Bama. This idea that Saban has this unprecedented ability to always find great assistants isnt realistic. The fact these assistants get to coach the best talent around is realistic and factual.

Yes I agree. Fill our roster with 4-5 star guys and we could compete with a competent coach, I don't think we could dominate like Saban has done for years. There is the difference between competent and great.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#70
#70
If they start paying college football players, I hope that Harvard and Yale start fighting for the NC every year sprinkled in with the occasional Vanderbilt. And it is not out of the realm of possibilities either. Michigan also has a pretty big endowment...

It will kill college sports.


Oh well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#72
#72
Manziel was overrated. Sorry, but watch some of those clips. His receivers made him look far better than he was.

I am sure his receivers were great. When you beat Bama as a college qb you get some cred.

The eye test told me Manziel and Dobbs were both dynamic in college.

I dont care anything about what a player does after college, has no bearing on my view of what they did in college.
 
#73
#73
A couple of considerations:

A lot of college athletics will go away - particularly women's sports.

If you don't believe that athletes are compensated, then consider the student loan "crisis". The horror stories about student debt should pretty well quantify the fact that athletes are getting paid very well. If the issue is that athletes are basically indentured servants working their way to the NCAA or NBA, take that up with the pro sports who use college athletics as farm teams.

Not necessarily. You can separate profitable sports from non-profitable. You can have a football team full of university employees and a field hockey team with scholarship "amateur" athletes and non-scholarship amateur club athletes.

BUT, if they go away, is that a bad thing? Why should those uninteresting sports be propped up by interesting sports? The whole system is unnatural and is a market inefficiency. Pretty much the only reason we have field hockey scholarships is title IX. Should that exist?

The issue isn't indentured servitude. It's not that they're not compensated. It's that the NCAA has monopoly power and set up an anti-competitive system that violates anti-trust law and allows firms to collude to pay employees with only benefits. This would not fly in any other arena of life, but we're doing it to kids because they basically have no power.
 
#75
#75
Not necessarily. You can separate profitable sports from non-profitable. You can have a football team full of university employees and a field hockey team with scholarship "amateur" athletes and non-scholarship amateur club athletes.

BUT, if they go away, is that a bad thing? Why should those uninteresting sports be propped up by interesting sports? The whole system is unnatural and is a market inefficiency. Pretty much the only reason we have field hockey scholarships is title IX. Should that exist?

The issue isn't indentured servitude. It's not that they're not compensated. It's that the NCAA has monopoly power and set up an anti-competitive system that violates anti-trust law and allows firms to collude to pay employees with only benefits. This would not fly in any other arena of life, but we're doing it to kids because they basically have no power.

Agree with alot of this.

I dont understand title 9 fully, but I dont like what I know about it in how it relates to college sports.

And I say this with 2 of my kids competing pretty seriously in non revenue sports. It is absurd to think others should be burdened with making sure they have the opportunity to compete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64

VN Store



Back
Top