The Official “Regular Posters of the Basketball Forum” Thread

[cncchris33]

I should clarify. I don’t like how the importance of the 3 point line from the NBA has dripped into college basketball. It’s fine with professionals. It’s hard to watch when it’s a 9-4 and a 7-6 SEC team chuck up 50 combined 3’s

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing it up.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

This doesn't make the point you think it does. As an example, tell me how much of that $150-$250 k is derived from paid wages/salaries?

Yes. Greedy administrator guy cost accounting argument. A $10 million/year head football coach divided by 100 players is $100k of “benefits” GIVEN to each student-athlete.

 

[Vol49er]

Man, to put it bluntly, I hate college basketball. Still watch Tennessee and Michigan. But between the 3 point line, the physical play, and the awful, awful officiating…I barely watch the sport outside of March Madness.

I don’t follow enough to give meaningful comments to the board. Still read posts and threads but I delegate to the true diehards that watch the team.

(Also I like the job Barnes has been doing the last few years, for those who miss our debates)

Oh well if you’re not gonna bag on Barnes you bring no value …


Kidding ofc. I don’t disagree with the criticisms, CBB is just my favorite sport to watch despite them. Honestly my only thing is I get so invested in Tennessee doing well I almost enjoy games we’re not in more because I’m not stressing out

 

[VolGee4]

This doesn't make the point you think it does. As an example, tell me how much of that $150-$250 k is derived from paid wages/salaries?

It absolutely does. The age-old argument is that student-athletes just get a free education. Actually, they don't. They get a free education, free meals, free lodging, free apparel, free healthcare, free tutors, free nutritionists, free lounges with entertainment, free gyms to maintain their bodies, free coaching from presumably competent teachers, free branding through school platforms, free visibility at a venue that holds 100k, and free tv time., etc. I am sure there is more. Even several years back before NIL, they also received annual stipends. I am not an economist, but the value added from being a student athlete can be astronomical. Even someone like Zion Williamson enhanced his value by going to a place like Duke. He was always going to be a pro, but he wasn't always going to be the #1 pick. His one year at Duke enhanced his value with being #1 and by getting his shoe deal. Now, he has been injured his pro career. So, one can argue that if he didn't get the exposure at Duke, he would probably be worth less.

Look, I am not anti-capitalism, but people forget all of this in the discussion. Obviously, regular students don't have the talent to be offered the chance (i.e. market), but they would have to pay for all of these services, and it would be outrageous. There is absolutely value for any kid (whether from a poor home or wealthy home) to be able to take advantage of the opportunity.

I get kids should be able to profit from their NIL, but it has become the wild west. I don't think this argument is mutually exclusive- you can be pro-capitalism and still concerned with how it's going and acknowledge that student athletes get more than just a "free education."

 

[cncchris33]

As someone else said already, the conversation seems to be shifting ba k and forth between the original issue I took exception with, and NIL.

I'm fine with kids profiting off their name, image, and likeness. The NCAA amended their stance and have allowed that to happen legally.

What I'm not in favor of is the federal government stepping in to circumvent a reasonable rule created by the governing body of collegiate sports to maintain a semblance of competitive balance and order by holding kids accountable for their decisions on which schools to attend. You can't just allow them to become vagrants every year chasing the next best situation. And any attempt to draw the correlation of coaches leaving for greener pastures and players doing the like is not an apple to apples comparison because the coaches are professionals and employees of the university, and have to pay a buyout in most cases. The players are still, technically, amateurs. As long as NIL isn't supposed to be tied to pay for play, you can't enforce any sort of buyout or payback for them, so the only way to prevent total chaos is to restrict their ability to freely move the in a similar way that a professional player contract restricts free movement.

 

[Dallasbowlin]

Y’all want some bad news? Lol

Remember the 2021 game against Tech? When neither team could shot the ball very well and both teams complained about the ball? Well, they’re using that ball Saturday night against NC State.

 

[cncchris33]

Y’all want some bad news? Lol

Remember the 2021 game against Tech? When neither team could shot the ball very well and both teams complained about the ball? Well, they’re using that ball Saturday night against NC State.

Just heard that. Take the under.

 

[VolArmy74]

It absolutely does. The age-old argument is that student-athletes just get a free education. Actually, they don't. They get a free education, free meals, free lodging, free apparel, free healthcare, free tutors, free nutritionists, free lounges with entertainment, free gyms to maintain their bodies, free coaching from presumably competent teachers, free branding through school platforms, free visibility at a venue that holds 100k, and free tv time., etc. I am sure there is more. Even several years back before NIL, they also received annual stipends. I am not an economist, but the value added from being a student athlete can be astronomical. Even someone like Zion Williamson enhanced his value by going to a place like Duke. He was always going to be a pro, but he wasn't always going to be the #1 pick. His one year at Duke enhanced his value with being #1 and by getting his shoe deal. Now, he has been injured his pro career. So, one can argue that if he didn't get the exposure at Duke, he would probably be worth less.

Look, I am not anti-capitalism, but people forget all of this in the discussion. Obviously, regular students don't have the talent to be offered the chance (i.e. market), but they would have to pay for all of these services, and it would be outrageous. There is absolutely value for any kid (whether from a poor home or wealthy home) to be able to take advantage of the opportunity.

I get kids should be able to profit from their NIL, but it has become the wild west. I don't think this argument is mutually exclusive- you can be pro-capitalism and still concerned with how it's going and acknowledge that student athletes get more than just a "free education."

None of that is free. They get that for their labor and massive time investment, in return, schools get giant piles of cash. Poll them all and ask if they want the money or the services you mentioned. The school counts money the athletic department gives the academic side as part of the cost for a student athlete. They literally count paying themselves as a cost for them and a benefit for an athlete.

 

[VolArmy74]

As someone else said already, the conversation seems to be shifting ba k and forth between the original issue I took exception with, and NIL.

I'm fine with kids profiting off their name, image, and likeness. The NCAA amended their stance and have allowed that to happen legally.

What I'm not in favor of is the federal government stepping in to circumvent a reasonable rule created by the governing body of collegiate sports to maintain a semblance of competitive balance and order by holding kids accountable for their decisions on which schools to attend. You can't just allow them to become vagrants every year chasing the next best situation. And any attempt to draw the correlation of coaches leaving for greener pastures and players doing the like is not an apple to apples comparison because the coaches are professionals and employees of the university, and have to pay a buyout in most cases. The players are still, technically, amateurs. As long as NIL isn't supposed to be tied to pay for play, you can't enforce any sort of buyout or payback for them, so the only way to prevent total chaos is to restrict their ability to freely move the in a similar way that a professional player contract restricts free movement.

Here's why I have no issue with it. Scholarships are one year deals and schools can send you packing at any point they wish during any year. If a school can give you the boot with no penalty, you should be able to give the school a boot with no penalty.

 

[VolGee4]

None of that is free. They get that for their labor and massive time investment, in return, schools get giant piles of cash. Poll them all and ask if they want the money or the services you mentioned. The school counts money the athletic department gives the academic side as part of the cost for a student athlete. They literally count paying themselves as a cost for them and a benefit for an athlete.

Then, let’s eliminate college athletics, and they are all free to sign contracts at 18 years old with whatever teams/leagues they want to. They can pay for all of those services and have their advisor team that gets them the branding and exposure. That would be getting them the cash they want.

If this were the case, many kids would get left out because many don’t make it at the pro level.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

It absolutely does. The age-old argument is that student-athletes just get a free education. Actually, they don't. They get a free education, free meals, free lodging, free apparel, free healthcare, free tutors, free nutritionists, free lounges with entertainment, free gyms to maintain their bodies, free coaching from presumably competent teachers, free branding through school platforms, free visibility at a venue that holds 100k, and free tv time., etc. I am sure there is more. Even several years back before NIL, they also received annual stipends. I am not an economist, but the value added from being a student athlete can be astronomical. Even someone like Zion Williamson enhanced his value by going to a place like Duke. He was always going to be a pro, but he wasn't always going to be the #1 pick. His one year at Duke enhanced his value with being #1 and by getting his shoe deal. Now, he has been injured his pro career. So, one can argue that if he didn't get the exposure at Duke, he would probably be worth less.

Look, I am not anti-capitalism, but people forget all of this in the discussion. Obviously, regular students don't have the talent to be offered the chance (i.e. market), but they would have to pay for all of these services, and it would be outrageous. There is absolutely value for any kid (whether from a poor home or wealthy home) to be able to take advantage of the opportunity.

I get kids should be able to profit from their NIL, but it has become the wild west. I don't think this argument is mutually exclusive- you can be pro-capitalism and still concerned with how it's going and acknowledge that student athletes get more than just a "free education."

You didn't answer the question which I suspect you realize is problematic for your position. Literally everybody around the "student athletes" is making a sh*tload of money which, in turn, inflates the benefits.

Also, NIL is a different legal issue from antitrust which is what we are discussing.

And nobody is forgetting anything...of course, they get other benefits so tell me the ratio between the pro rata value of benefits received versus total revenue. Bottom line...we have laws against monopolies for a reason and no amount of "hand waving" by the colluding parties and appeal to contrived notions of nostalgia or tradition can change that.

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

And we have a pseudo-form of that with NIL right now and are probably trending to actual contracts within the next 5 years. I’m just not a fan of the lawless wasteland that college athletics has become. I don’t even have a problem with a one-time free transfer. But allowing multi-time transfers to move at will without extenuating circumstances is just bad for the sport.

I understand what you are saying and, as I stated in a previous post, I don't like much of what is happening to college athletics.

Having said that, the reality is that it was destined to turn out this way precisely because of lawlessness (e.g., monopoly in violation of antitrust laws) which created a very corrupt organization (NCAA) primarily based on greed and the lies of altruism for student athletes which was NEVER true.

Now we have to live with the consequences as this gets sorted out.

 

[VolGee4]

You didn't answer the question which I suspect you realize is problematic for your position. Literally everybody around the "student athletes" is making a sh*tload of money which, in turn, inflates the benefits.

Also, NIL is a different legal issue from antitrust which is what we are discussing.

And nobody is forgetting anything...of course, they get other benefits so tell me the ratio between the pro rata value of benefits received versus total revenue. Bottom line...we have laws against monopolies for a reason and no amount of "hand waving" by the colluding parties and appeal to contrived notions of nostalgia or tradition can change that.

I see it somewhat differently. This is a can of worms with other topics that can be discussed as well.

736 student athletes at UT....total revenue has been roughly $150 million and jumped up to $202 million. Average of $274,000 per student athlete with many variables in between.

I enjoy your posts, so I will just leave it at we disagree on some topics.

 

[Lefteye]

I should clarify. I don’t like how the importance of the 3 point line from the NBA has dripped into college basketball. It’s fine with professionals. It’s hard to watch when it’s a 9-4 and a 7-6 SEC team chuck up 50 combined 3’s

Got to agree. Not the same product I grew up loving but the good will always outweigh the bad in college basketball for me. I can't say that for other sports. But man do I definitely agree about the 3 point chuckin.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

It absolutely does. The age-old argument is that student-athletes just get a free education. Actually, they don't. They get a free education, free meals, free lodging, free apparel, free healthcare, free tutors, free nutritionists, free lounges with entertainment, free gyms to maintain their bodies, free coaching from presumably competent teachers, free branding through school platforms, free visibility at a venue that holds 100k, and free tv time., etc. I am sure there is more. Even several years back before NIL, they also received annual stipends. I am not an economist, but the value added from being a student athlete can be astronomical. Even someone like Zion Williamson enhanced his value by going to a place like Duke. He was always going to be a pro, but he wasn't always going to be the #1 pick. His one year at Duke enhanced his value with being #1 and by getting his shoe deal. Now, he has been injured his pro career. So, one can argue that if he didn't get the exposure at Duke, he would probably be worth less.

Look, I am not anti-capitalism, but people forget all of this in the discussion. Obviously, regular students don't have the talent to be offered the chance (i.e. market), but they would have to pay for all of these services, and it would be outrageous. There is absolutely value for any kid (whether from a poor home or wealthy home) to be able to take advantage of the opportunity.

I get kids should be able to profit from their NIL, but it has become the wild west. I don't think this argument is mutually exclusive- you can be pro-capitalism and still concerned with how it's going and acknowledge that student athletes get more than just a "free education."

All of those perks were implemented as ways to compensate the athletes without actually paying them and therefore counting them as either employees or contractors. As you said, that stuff absolutely has value though, just not as much value as it probably should given the revenue generated for the AD. I don’t think the Wild West is where anyone wants to end up, but we can’t go back to just pretending that these kids aren’t in a business relationship with the schools. In my mind, the only solution is to treat it like the business it is and have contracts and fair compensation. Probably also have some sort of collectively bargained salary cap system to maintain parity.

 

[cncchris33]

Here's why I have no issue with it. Scholarships are one year deals and schools can send you packing at any point they wish during any year. If a school can give you the boot with no penalty, you should be able to give the school a boot with no penalty.

And that's a fair point. I'd prefer to see the NCAA force schools to guarantee scholarships for 4 years provided the SA remains in good academic standing and has no academic/school policy violations or run-ins with the law.

I'd much rather see that enforced than allow what amounts to perpetual free agency in college athletics.

 

[VolArmy74]

Then, let’s eliminate college athletics, and they are all free to sign contracts at 18 years old with whatever teams/leagues they want to. They can pay for all of those services and have their advisor team that gets them the branding and exposure. That would be getting them the cash they want.

If this were the case, many kids would get left out because many don’t make it at the pro level.

Thus is life. People that are the best in their field leave behind people that aren't as qualified, every day, across every aspect of life. If you want to keep a person somewhere for multiple years, sign them to multi-year deals. The NFL provides everything you mention except tutors. They are still able to pay tons of money to their athletes.

The issue is and always has been, schools want to take all the pie, owners in pro leagues used to do this.

Giving people things you mention is akin to a factory giving an employee a machine to manufacture goods for them, tools to repair it with, and counting it as part of their pay.

If the schools went to a business model, title 9 rules wouldn't apply any more. There's not a WNFL. The WNBA exists not because federal law makes it exist.

I don't care if players are on contracts, getting paid, whatever. If the jersey says Tennessee Vols, I'm a fan. It doesn't change my enjoyment in any way if people who generate the money are getting compensated for doing it.

I also don't pretend that the best athletes are there for academic purposes. I actually suspect a good deal would never otherwise be in college at all from a purely academic standpoint. It's pretty well known that the 1 and done players don't even sniff a classroom as it is now.

 

[TheMookieMonster]

 

[MinisterofDef#92]

I see it somewhat differently. This is a can of worms with other topics that can be discussed as well.

736 student athletes at UT....total revenue has been roughly $150 million and jumped up to $202 million. Average of $274,000 per student athlete with many variables in between.

I enjoy your posts, so I will just leave it at we disagree on some topics.

Agreements and disagreements are what the board is for...none of us will agree on everything so all good there - I enjoy being able to debate a bit and go back and forth.

Thanks for the numbers you provided...this would show a +500x disparity is quite large (a CEO making $5 MM per year is only 67x greater than a frontline employee whose total consideration is $75 k as a comparison). If one were to then make adjustments to the $275 k number based on how fungible those benefits are to either being compensated or future earning power, the disparity gets decidedly worse. Disparities of this kind can only happen in an economic system via some form of a monopoly.

 

[VolGee4]

Agreements and disagreements are what the board is for...none of us will agree on everything so all good there - I enjoy being able to debate a bit and go back and forth.

Thanks for the numbers you provided...this would show a +500x disparity is quite large (a CEO making $5 MM per year is only 67x greater than a frontline employee whose total consideration is $75 k as a comparison). If one were to then make adjustments to the $275 k number based on how fungible those benefits are to either being compensated or future earning power, the disparity gets decidedly worse. Disparities of this kind can only happen in an economic system via some form of a monopoly.

Again, there are a bunch of variables. An athletic department is non-profit and doesn’t have shareholders. It essentially spends the revenue that it brings in, which wouldn’t happen with a company.

Plus, part of the revenue for an athletic department is from fundraising when you can convince donors that you are raising capital to improve facilities, pay for scholarships, etc. Would that same money come in if it wasn’t for capital improvements or scholarships? The improvements are partially for the players but also for the fans themselves, and donors are most likely not paying to line players’ pockets if NIL is also being paid.

Just a bunch of things to analyze when discussing this.

 

[IndianapolisVol]

CAN YOU TAKE ME HIGHER,
TO A PLACE WHERE BLIND MEN SEE

 

[IndianapolisVol]

Y’all want some bad news? Lol

Remember the 2021 game against Tech? When neither team could shot the ball very well and both teams complained about the ball? Well, they’re using that ball Saturday night against NC State.

Dal, long time no talk, how you been man?

 

[TheMookieMonster]

Pretty solid climb up the Net rankings for us these past 10 days after wins over Illinois and NC State.

Kind of surprised Kentucky is that low, but I guess that UNCW loss is crushing them.

 

[VolGee4]

Pretty solid climb up the Net rankings for us these past 10 days after wins over Illinois and NC State.

Kind of surprised Kentucky is that low, but I guess that UNCW loss is crushing them.

Kentucky’s SOS on KenPom isn’t good, and they don’t have a road/neutral win. We have a true road win and two neutral wins. In fact, Kentucky hasn’t even played a true road game yet. Cal doesn’t help his team by scheduling like that.

 

[Col_Cathcart]

Kentucky’s SOS on KenPom isn’t good, and they don’t have a road/neutral win. We have a true road win and two neutral wins. In fact, Kentucky hasn’t even played a true road game yet. Cal doesn’t help his team by scheduling like that.

Eh. They get a bump come selection Sunday just based off their name. They don’t need a real resume.