I have no problem with the AG at all. There are a few reasons.
I was a freshman at WKU before I transferred to UT my sophomore year. I was in a dorm with the wku football players. Scholarship players could eat and had a place to stay, and yes, they got an education. However, having a job could possibly get someone into trouble if one was not in the in group of teams such as the bamers, etc and if, for example, one did not have laundry money, it was not quite as easy to "legally" acquire it like a regular joe because of a stupid organization's control. I told my father about that and have kept that same belief even to today.
While some rules might have been changed so not to be as strict over time in such cases or that was something that the most fair ncaa (BS) mostly chose to overlook, that stuff went on in a number of places and a team like wku was not in a position like others including even our beloved institution to stay away from scrutiny like the big boys. That being said, while great UT fans like Tennstud had to move on because the higher ups on campus wanted it because of fear of the ncaa in my opinion, some of those other darlings of the ncaa continued without a care in the world and it took a lot to get the ncaa to do something to its favorites.
As a capitalist, the situation of the ncaa's striving for fairness (BS) which began probably in and around the 70's with its clear favoritism and selective enforcement became a lot like some political systems that are in our world where say a person points out obvious ill behavior by the in group or some member of it and then finds himself being cancelled, derided, and even possibly placed under indictment as a result of revenge. While someone may do wrong and I believe one should be accountable, none of that matters if the in group is doing it.
This cleaning up by the ncaa was a bunch of BS. I'm glad it went away. That is not only because I am a capitalist, but because like many organizations (churches come to mind here), they are in fact in it for themselves and not for the purpose to which they say they place their allegiance. It's only advertisement to make others think they really are in it for the good of things.
Sure they use some of the highly thought of good guys to represent them, but many times, those good guys know what is going on and likely just don't pay attention to it. In other cases, they are too stupid to realize what really is going on.
Those who believe that the pristine amateur athlete days which in reality never existed and who are quite saddened by the greed of the athlete do not seem to have a problem with the the organizations who have been doing all of these things. Additionally, sisters of the poor is likely never going to be in the mix against the big boys and people need to learn to live with it.
Also, why think of the ones who are providing the entertainment as being a problem while the others running the show are just fine people?
In summary, the ncaa student athlete agenda over the last probably 50 years or so was a joke. Athletes got paid all over the place. I have no problem with that except for those certain coaches /teams and the ncaa who acted like all was well and that their team was a beacon of light to the world. It is interesting to see who does not like this new way of doing things.
It will not be perfect, but I have lived long enough to be confident that it will be fairer than having a ruling body who will always have its favorites. In fact, some billionaire with a love for a sport may end up making a school one of the competitors by his contributions and it will happen sooner than just giving to some university athletic department.
The basis of country was formed by intelligent men who knew there would be problem people, but who also knew that if freedom is abundant, that the production of whatever would have the best opportunity to get toward the best it can be.
Also, I would love to see players take their income, treat it with respect, and set themselves and their families up for the future.
BTW, Pruitt is not that smart and what he did certainly was not.
