Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(International Business Times)   NCAA rules player ineligible for making money on YouTube as NCAA makes money off player   ( ibtimes.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, American football, Viacom, La Haye, YouTube, Google, United States, YouTube channel, NCAA student-athlete rules  
•       •       •

1212 clicks; posted to Sports » on 31 Jul 2017 at 11:57 PM (11 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



43 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-07-31 06:20:07 PM  
But it was ok for Danny Ainge to play professional baseball while still on his college basketball team?
img.fark.net
 
2017-07-31 08:21:38 PM  
Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar
 
2017-07-31 08:21:41 PM  
DNRTFA but I'll bet the guy isn't in the SEC.
 
2017-07-31 08:26:16 PM  
If he's a decent kicker, watch Belichick invite him as a walkon.
 
2017-07-31 10:03:19 PM  
I absolutely do not understand any of this.  I went to college for film, photography and a few other things.  There was never some stipulation that I could not monetize my art.  People could buy my photographs.  I could work for money on film crews (heck, I think that was encouraged- though a lot of kids in school would end up with non-paying internships, as that is the norm for someone with not-so-honed skills.)

But regardless, there are plenty of people who've made a lot of money from things they did in school, using school resources.  Films have come out of film school.

I now do computer programming, but that was self taught.  I know there are plenty of computer programming degrees (much more so now)- and I assume the people working towards these degrees are also making money doing whatever computer programming they have skills, at that point, to do.

This makes no sense to me at all.  If you don't want to pay the players- that is a separate argument.  But for someone to go out and make money on their likeness and skills... that makes them in the wrong?  In what universe?
 
2017-07-31 10:33:58 PM  

Gubbo: Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar


Well, and a free education.  Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This kid is a kicker for UCF, chances are he's not going to go pro, so the free tuition room and board are a pretty nice deal.

The reasons the NCAA has such strong rules about amateur status and eligibility is because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.  There is a lot of money for a certain cadre of schools, and they've shown they're willing to bend the rules as far as they can to gain an advantage.  In order to maintain some semblance of a level playing field between the haves and have-nots, these rules need to exist.  They do, however, need to be enforced more equally, and schools should be penalized for having a high number of players leave for the draft before graduation, the focus should still be on the student part of student athletes and the system should not act as a de facto minor league.

As far as paying players directly goes, it would destroy the entire college sports system.  Some schools could afford it, most could not, and the Title IX lawsuits would strain even the big-name institutions.  Football, men's basketball, baseball, and hockey are the sports that make money (and in most schools not all of those do).  Aside from UCONN's women's basketball program, I don't believe there's a single profitable women's collegiate sports team.  The profits from the big men's sports go to support all of the women's sports and the lesser-viewed men's sports like wrestling, golf, rowing, track and field, etc.  Those sports allow many more students than play in the profit-center sports to attend school and graduate without debt.

Overall the system needs some tweaking, but we shouldn't be paying players, and the NCAA does need to enforce rules about players using their status as athletes to earn money.
 
2017-07-31 10:47:16 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: and the NCAA does need to enforce rules about players using their status as athletes to earn money.


Why?  It is their likeness.  That makes no sense to me.  Your paying players argument I can understand.

But look at my post above... why can't a player make money however he/she wishes on their own likeness and skills while playing sports for a college?

How does that hurt anyone at all?  That is the question- not paying players.  I get the nuances of THAT are complicated.
 
2017-07-31 11:45:02 PM  

downstairs: TuteTibiImperes: and the NCAA does need to enforce rules about players using their status as athletes to earn money.

Why?  It is their likeness.  That makes no sense to me.  Your paying players argument I can understand.

But look at my post above... why can't a player make money however he/she wishes on their own likeness and skills while playing sports for a college?

How does that hurt anyone at all?  That is the question- not paying players.  I get the nuances of THAT are complicated.


It blurs the line between amateur and professional and it sets the table for a lot of abuse.  You take a school like Alabama, and the coach/recruiter lets a potential player know that if he signs with them he'll be able to sell autographs for big bucks to boosters and fans (who could have the money funneled to them through the school) vs another school like Vanderbilt (in the same conference) or Western Kentucky (to go with another) who may not be able to do that - that gives Alabama an unfair advantage.

There are a handful of schools making huge money on sports, and a great majority that may earn a little or not even cover their costs.  When you start allowing players to directly profit from their athletic prowess at the college level it tilts the tables even further in favor of the big profitable schools, and the NCAA exists in part to help keep all member institutions (at least in each division) on as level a playing field as they can.
 
2017-08-01 12:08:30 AM  

Gubbo: I'll just say, last form of legal slavery


img.fark.net
 
2017-08-01 01:04:01 AM  

Gubbo: So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery


Okay, so I just wanted to acknowledge that I took the bait but you're just as farking stupid with that comment as the NCAA is.

In addition to having twenty nine total tackles in one game against those communist motherfarkers up north and sporting a far manlier 'stache at eighteen than Sidney Crosby could even if Crosby never shaves for the rest of his life, Spielman will hopefully keep the ball rolling towards current players getting more.

Chris Spielman's lawsuit against Ohio State could set monumental precedent

Crosby is such a little biatch, even if he is already one of the best hockey players to ever live.

s1.postimg.org
 
2017-08-01 01:29:51 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Gubbo: Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar

Well, and a free education.  Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This kid is a kicker for UCF, chances are he's not going to go pro, so the free tuition room and board are a pretty nice deal.

The reasons the NCAA has such strong rules about amateur status and eligibility is because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.  There is a lot of money for a certain cadre of schools, and they've shown they're willing to bend the rules as far as they can to gain an advantage.  In order to maintain some semblance of a level playing field between the haves and have-nots, these rules need to exist.  They do, however, need to be enforced more equally, and schools should be penalized for having a high number of players leave for the draft before graduation, the focus should still be on the student part of student athletes and the system should not act as a de facto minor league.

As far as paying players directly goes, it would destroy the entire college sports system.  Some schools could afford it, most could not, and the Title IX lawsuits would strain even the big-name institutions.  Football, men's basketball, baseball, and hockey are the sports that make money (and in most schools not all of those do).  Aside from UCONN's women's basketball program, I don't believe there's a single profitable women's collegiate sports team.  The profits from the big men's sports go to support all of the women's sports and the lesser-viewed men's sports like wrestling, golf, rowing, track and field, etc.  Those sports allow many more students than play in the profit-center sports to attend school and graduate without debt.

Overall the system needs some tweaking, but we shouldn't be paying players, and the NCAA does need to enforce rules about players using their status as athletes to earn money.


I think the best solution I've heard would be to have the kids do football activities forty hours a week*, receive a reasonable increase on their stipend of maybe $250.00 a week, and have their schooling fully paid for if started within twenty years (fifteen would also be acceptable) of their college eligibility expiring. I'm not a lawyer but have the money be set aside (would a trust be the proper term?) by an entity representing the school (Athletic Department, the university itself, however they'd want to work it out). 

Now there are some kids who really want to get their diploma while playing, or to at least make strong strides towards that so what about them? Too late to think of the details but that could be worked out, there is always a way.

Some kids just don't realize how important that diploma is until it is too late and that really sucks. Some of those kids correct their mistakes though.

s1.postimg.org

*Michigan does this already
 
2017-08-01 02:23:48 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: Well, and a free education. Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.


This is a complete load of shiat. It's not "free", it's conditioned on them playing their sport. The NCAA has fixed their compensation as the scholarship. That's illegal.

TuteTibiImperes: It blurs the line between amateur and professional and it sets the table for a lot of abuse.


"Amateur" is a complete joke and it's already abused.

TuteTibiImperes: that gives Alabama an unfair advantage


you are out of your mind if you think they already don't have this. There is no "level playing field" and there never has been.

TuteTibiImperes: There are a handful of schools making huge money on sports


Bullshiat. Everyone is farking rolling in it. Look at their weight rooms. Look at their stadiums. Look at their coaching staffs. Look at their 5 jerseys and 3 helmets and massive equipment closet. College sports rakes it in and looks everywhere to spend it except on the people who actually bring in that money.

There's a very simple solution to this: remove the illegal ban on players receiving benefits and let them negotiate on the free market like everyone else. Are you worth a scholarship? That's what you get. Are you worth way more than that? Then schools should compete for your services.
 
2017-08-01 03:15:02 AM  
I'm confused, they say he can not get compensated for his athletic prowess and he is a kicker.

These things don't seem to go together, not sure what the problem was.
 
2017-08-01 06:52:59 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: As far as paying players directly goes, it would destroy the entire college sports system.  Some schools could afford it, most could not,


And this is different from the current system how? There's already a mysterious coincidence in which the best-funded programs somehow manage to recruit top players over and over again. Why not just be open and honest about the fact that money buys talent, and pay the talent while you're at it?
 
2017-08-01 07:11:39 AM  

ElwoodCuse: TuteTibiImperes: Well, and a free education. Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This is a complete load of shiat. It's not "free", it's conditioned on them playing their sport. The NCAA has fixed their compensation as the scholarship. That's illegal.


They're students, not employees, and no one is forcing them to attend anywhere or play football.  The vast majority of students at every school do not attend on athletic scholarships, and if they have the wherewithal to attend without one that's an option they can avail themselves of.

TuteTibiImperes: It blurs the line between amateur and professional and it sets the table for a lot of abuse.

"Amateur" is a complete joke and it's already abused.


It is abused right now, and the NCAA should put a stop to those abuses.  As I mentioned, schools should be penalized for having a large number of athletes leave the school before graduation.  There should be regulations holding student-athletes to the same academic standards for admission as the general student body.  The NCAA should investigate reports of academic dishonesty and grade fixing much more thoroughly and come down incredibly hard on any school found to be doing it.

TuteTibiImperes: that gives Alabama an unfair advantage

you are out of your mind if you think they already don't have this. There is no "level playing field" and there never has been.


In the past competition was on a more even keel, the disparity has been getting worse, and the NCAA should work to rectify that as they can.

TuteTibiImperes: There are a handful of schools making huge money on sports

Bullshiat. Everyone is farking rolling in it. Look at their weight rooms. Look at their stadiums. Look at their coaching staffs. Look at their 5 jerseys and 3 helmets and massive equipment closet. College sports rakes it in and looks everywhere to spend it except on the people who actually bring in that money.

There's a very simple solution to this: remove the illegal ban on players receiving benefits and let them negotiate on the free market like everyone else. Are you worth a scholarship? That's what you get. Are you worth way more than that? Then schools should compete for your services.


You have no idea what you're talking about.  Sure, the schools in the power conferences by and large have a lot of money (some far more than others) but the NCAA isn't the P5 alone, there are far more schools outside the P5 (plus the FCS, DII, and DIII) who are spending more athletics than they're bringing in.
 
2017-08-01 08:16:53 AM  

Gubbo: Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar


They get cash. Like, actual, real money that you get to hold in your hand. I mean, most players get it direct deposited but it's unrestricted money they get from the university in exchange for their participation on the team. Yeah, the NCAA can be coy about what it's called, saying it's a "housing allotment" and a "cost of attendance stipend" but let's be honest, it's just more of them being hypocritical about amateurism.
 
2017-08-01 08:32:10 AM  

ElwoodCuse: TuteTibiImperes: Well, and a free education. Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This is a complete load of shiat. It's not "free", it's conditioned on them playing their sport. The NCAA has fixed their compensation as the scholarship. That's illegal.

TuteTibiImperes: It blurs the line between amateur and professional and it sets the table for a lot of abuse.

"Amateur" is a complete joke and it's already abused.

TuteTibiImperes: that gives Alabama an unfair advantage

you are out of your mind if you think they already don't have this. There is no "level playing field" and there never has been.

TuteTibiImperes: There are a handful of schools making huge money on sports

Bullshiat. Everyone is farking rolling in it. Look at their weight rooms. Look at their stadiums. Look at their coaching staffs. Look at their 5 jerseys and 3 helmets and massive equipment closet. College sports rakes it in and looks everywhere to spend it except on the people who actually bring in that money.

There's a very simple solution to this: remove the illegal ban on players receiving benefits and let them negotiate on the free market like everyone else. Are you worth a scholarship? That's what you get. Are you worth way more than that? Then schools should compete for your services.


Exactly.  I wish the NFL would start drafting from smaller leagues instead of colleges.  Just like how the NHL does it.  Most NHL players are drafted from OHL, WHL, and foreign countries, and that is because the players who have talent are betting on it by staying out of college and focusing on playing.  And the players who don't make it in the NHL from WHL or OHL still go to college after their pro careers are over.  Screw the NCAA and the coaches who don't care a player ends up injured for no money.  If a player wants to play till they're permanently injured, at least do it in a pro league where they will have some financial support for it.
 
2017-08-01 08:32:33 AM  

downstairs: TuteTibiImperes: and the NCAA does need to enforce rules about players using their status as athletes to earn money.

Why?  It is their likeness.  That makes no sense to me.  Your paying players argument I can understand.

But look at my post above... why can't a player make money however he/she wishes on their own likeness and skills while playing sports for a college?

How does that hurt anyone at all?  That is the question- not paying players.  I get the nuances of THAT are complicated.


They can.

If you read the article, the problem is that he wouldn't separate the stuff he did that was his non-football stuff from his football stuff.

Seems like he could've just made his football videos non-monetized and his non-football videos (which are supposedly more popular) monetized and there wouldn't have been an issue.

Student athletes are allowed to use their likeness, they are just not allowed to use their status as college athletes to capitalize on that likeness. For example, you don't want college players advertising...unsavory services and making it appear as though the school and NCAA support that product. Or even a dishonest local car dealer or something.

Of course, that means the same rules should apply to college coaches.

Also, I have an idea: use all the money the schools make off those sports to fund school endowments. (I'd say include it in operational revenue, but when the broadcast money dries up, there would be a LOT of cutbacks).
 
2017-08-01 08:34:23 AM  
Oh, and, y'know more practice limitations as well as adding that the athletic department gets zero influence on determining classes for students.
 
2017-08-01 08:48:43 AM  
Look there's just no money to pay the players. The coaches can make millions. The conferences can make millions. The broadcasters can make millions. The NCAA can exist on the backs of the 'student athletes'.

But there's just no money to pay the players. It's ok though because they're getting a very very valuable education with a major in Sports Leisure. At least the ones who aren't taking fake classes, anyway. It doesn't really matter that they don't want that crappy degree, it doesn't matter that they wouldn't even qualify to attend the school if not for their athletic prowess, it's totally fair to "give" them an "education" in exchange for them playing sports for their employers schools.

In the interest of fairness though, I have a suggestion that will surely satisfy everyone. Since the free room and board and the degree in Communicatioms are their compensation, they should have the option of taking the cash value of those things instead of participating in the farce of the student athlete. Stanford is what? 30k a year with tuition and room and and board? An athlete at Stanford should be able to take the 30 grand in cash if he isn't interested in a degree.

But we can't do that though! That's paying the players and destroys amateurism (which is vitally important when it translates to unpaid labor)! Instead they must take the compensation their employers are offering if they want to participate in athletics at that level.  According to everyone who profits from that arrangement, it's totally fair.
 
2017-08-01 08:48:52 AM  

lack of warmth: ElwoodCuse: TuteTibiImperes: Well, and a free education. Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This is a complete load of shiat. It's not "free", it's conditioned on them playing their sport. The NCAA has fixed their compensation as the scholarship. That's illegal.

TuteTibiImperes: It blurs the line between amateur and professional and it sets the table for a lot of abuse.

"Amateur" is a complete joke and it's already abused.

TuteTibiImperes: that gives Alabama an unfair advantage

you are out of your mind if you think they already don't have this. There is no "level playing field" and there never has been.

TuteTibiImperes: There are a handful of schools making huge money on sports

Bullshiat. Everyone is farking rolling in it. Look at their weight rooms. Look at their stadiums. Look at their coaching staffs. Look at their 5 jerseys and 3 helmets and massive equipment closet. College sports rakes it in and looks everywhere to spend it except on the people who actually bring in that money.

There's a very simple solution to this: remove the illegal ban on players receiving benefits and let them negotiate on the free market like everyone else. Are you worth a scholarship? That's what you get. Are you worth way more than that? Then schools should compete for your services.

Exactly.  I wish the NFL would start drafting from smaller leagues instead of colleges.  Just like how the NHL does it.  Most NHL players are drafted from OHL, WHL, and foreign countries, and that is because the players who have talent are betting on it by staying out of college and focusing on playing.  And the players who don't make it in the NHL from WHL or OHL still go to college after their pro careers are over.  Screw the NCAA and the coaches who don't care a player ends up injured for no money.  If a player wants to play till they're permanently injured, at least do it in a pro league where they will have some financial support fo ...


Is fully support the development of a 'minor league' football outside of the current college sports system.  IMO college sports should look more like the Ivy League and less like the SEC.  Let the ones with no interest in schooling play in the minor league, and let college sports go back to being true amateur student athletics.
 
2017-08-01 09:13:08 AM  

TuteTibiImperes: I fully support the development of a 'minor league' football outside of the current college sports system.  IMO college sports should look more like the Ivy League and less like the SEC.  Let the ones with no interest in schooling play in the minor league, and let college sports go back to being true amateur student athletics.


It could change if the NFL would consider changing the ages of their drafted players.  Age most drafted into the NFL, 22.  While the NHL drafts their players at around 18 -19, then don't take them full pro till they've earned the spot on the team.  I really like how the NHL does it.  Draft them early, let them continue to play for their current team, work with them to develop them, and sign a 3 year entry contract so they have some cash. The young players get to work with the NHL organization to build their skills, and us OHL/WHL fans get a much better bang for our buck watching those players during the season.

If the NFL would do that, the minor league football would grow.  But instead, they're getting a huge money savings by letting the colleges develop the players for them, then putting their draft picks straight into the game.  Everybody enjoys watching the young players doing their best, before going against seasoned veteran pros.  But using the NCAA system is just ripping off the players, and I'm glad the NHL doesn't use them so heavily.  Instead, a lot of the college players that do go NHL tend to do so early, instead of wasting years with no pay.  Dylan Larkin is a good example, and not one fan was hurt.  He started off a Wolverine, and is now a paid Red Wing.

Now don't confuse the OHL/WHL of just being strictly about the sport.  The players who don't go further in the pros, do get tuition money after their career is over.  So college is still being covered for them.  What those leagues pay during their playing is small, but at the end, they either have larger pro contracts, or college paid for.
 
2017-08-01 09:29:52 AM  

Law Talking Guy: Look there's just no money to pay the players. The coaches can make millions. The conferences can make millions. The broadcasters can make millions. The NCAA can exist on the backs of the 'student athletes'.

But there's just no money to pay the players. It's ok though because they're getting a very very valuable education with a major in Sports Leisure. At least the ones who aren't taking fake classes, anyway. It doesn't really matter that they don't want that crappy degree, it doesn't matter that they wouldn't even qualify to attend the school if not for their athletic prowess, it's totally fair to "give" them an "education" in exchange for them playing sports for their employers schools.

In the interest of fairness though, I have a suggestion that will surely satisfy everyone. Since the free room and board and the degree in Communicatioms are their compensation, they should have the option of taking the cash value of those things instead of participating in the farce of the student athlete. Stanford is what? 30k a year with tuition and room and and board? An athlete at Stanford should be able to take the 30 grand in cash if he isn't interested in a degree.

But we can't do that though! That's paying the players and destroys amateurism (which is vitally important when it translates to unpaid labor)! Instead they must take the compensation their employers are offering if they want to participate in athletics at that level.  According to everyone who profits from that arrangement, it's totally fair.


You could get rid of exemptions and require players to meet the same standards of actual students. Then you COULD make it so players must be allowed to attend classes of their choosing, and limit practice time to an appropriate amount per week.

Another thing conferences are doing is making the scholarships 4y and providing health coverage for 4y beyond their time playing at school.

Make the NFL pay for their own damn development league and get the money out of college sports.

/hahahaha 'cause organizations turn down legal money
 
2017-08-01 10:14:47 AM  
Is he doing the YouTube channel in a role as a football player? No? Then STFU and leave the guy alone. Christ, it's like you want them to make bad decisions.
 
2017-08-01 10:36:35 AM  
My google skills are failing me

What ever happened to the football team that voted to unionize to get the ncaa to pay them?
 
2017-08-01 10:40:15 AM  
Also the ncaa is full of shiat

They let johnny manziel sign thousands of dollars in memorabilia and copyright "johnny football" while playing by deferring payments

Whats the difference?
 
2017-08-01 11:05:22 AM  

smerfnablin: My google skills are failing me

What ever happened to the football team that voted to unionize to get the ncaa to pay them?


The NLRB wussed out and declined to rule if they could start a union or not
 
2017-08-01 11:14:58 AM  

WoodyHayes: TuteTibiImperes: Gubbo: Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar

Well, and a free education.  Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This kid is a kicker for UCF, chances are he's not going to go pro, so the free tuition room and board are a pretty nice deal.

The reasons the NCAA has such strong rules about amateur status and eligibility is because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.  There is a lot of money for a certain cadre of schools, and they've shown they're willing to bend the rules as far as they can to gain an advantage.  In order to maintain some semblance of a level playing field between the haves and have-nots, these rules need to exist.  They do, however, need to be enforced more equally, and schools should be penalized for having a high number of players leave for the draft before graduation, the focus should still be on the student part of student athletes and the system should not act as a de facto minor league.

As far as paying players directly goes, it would destroy the entire college sports system.  Some schools could afford it, most could not, and the Title IX lawsuits would strain even the big-name institutions.  Football, men's basketball, baseball, and hockey are the sports that make money (and in most schools not all of those do).  Aside from UCONN's women's basketball program, I don't believe there's a single profitable women's collegiate sports team.  The profits from the big men's sports go to support all of the women's sports and the lesser-viewed men's sports like wrestling, golf, rowing, track and field, etc.  Those sports allow many more students than play in the profit-center sp ...


I've proposed before that the big schools (think the "Power-5") should be allowed to have "Football Studies" as a major.  They take classes on play design, training, weight room, coaching, management, what an agent does, broadcasting, financial management, etc...  In addition, those that qualify for the team (analogous to something like a Theatre Major having to audition to get in the advanced acting classes), get 3 credits a semester for that.  Call it a "lab" course or a "practicum".

That solves a LOT of the issues with the "we ain't come here to play class" problems.  They train to be a player, if that doesn't work, they have the skills/education to be a coach/trainer/co-ordinator at a college or high school level or an agent or a financial rep for other players.  And even if they can't find a job afterwards, they're in the same boat as all the other kids who graduate with a degree they can't use.

/this could be extrapolated out to other sports as well
 
2017-08-01 11:41:49 AM  
That solves a LOT of the issues with the "we ain't come here to play class" problems

And ignores the single biggest issue of all: that the NCAA is illegally ripping kids off by making billions and price-fixing their compensation
 
2017-08-01 11:47:44 AM  

Law Talking Guy: Look there's just no money to pay the players. The coaches can make millions. The conferences can make millions. The broadcasters can make millions. The NCAA can exist on the backs of the 'student athletes'.

But there's just no money to pay the players. It's ok though because they're getting a very very valuable education with a major in Sports Leisure. At least the ones who aren't taking fake classes, anyway. It doesn't really matter that they don't want that crappy degree, it doesn't matter that they wouldn't even qualify to attend the school if not for their athletic prowess, it's totally fair to "give" them an "education" in exchange for them playing sports for their employers schools.

In the interest of fairness though, I have a suggestion that will surely satisfy everyone. Since the free room and board and the degree in Communicatioms are their compensation, they should have the option of taking the cash value of those things instead of participating in the farce of the student athlete. Stanford is what? 30k a year with tuition and room and and board? An athlete at Stanford should be able to take the 30 grand in cash if he isn't interested in a degree.

But we can't do that though! That's paying the players and destroys amateurism (which is vitally important when it translates to unpaid labor)! Instead they must take the compensation their employers are offering if they want to participate in athletics at that level.  According to everyone who profits from that arrangement, it's totally fair.


You can switch to a different model, but I don't think you're going to like the way it looks.  In football, kids develop professional level talent somewhat later in adolescence.  Professional leagues aren't going to be willing to provide them with much support until they can prove themselves.  In other sports, this has resulted in either having only rich kids play, or having some rather unsavory characters running the kids' lives in exchange for God knows what.  Even MLB looks pretty ugly when you look below the AA level.  I get that it pisses people off that there is a system where person A makes more than person B and you think that all money should be shared evenly, but the world doesn't work that way (except Venezuela).  Seriously, if you monetize everything a college athlete gets in exchange for their scholarship (including the brand loyalty that goes with the name on the front of the jersey) it ends up being a lot more valuable than most people realize.  Especially when you consider they would have to pay for it out of pocket if they were training to turn pro as they do in most other individual sports.
 
2017-08-01 11:54:33 AM  

Cataholic: Seriously, if you monetize everything a college athlete gets in exchange for their scholarship (including the brand loyalty that goes with the name on the front of the jersey) it ends up being a lot more valuable than most people realize.


They are still getting less compensation than they would if they were able to freely negotiate it, which is why the NCAA bans them from freely negotiating it
 
2017-08-01 11:58:24 AM  

abmoraz: WoodyHayes: TuteTibiImperes: Gubbo: Was gonna say something sarcastic. But I'm in Miami airport and don't have the urge to do anything except contemplate throwing myself out a window and into a jet engine just to escape Miami airport.

So I'll just say, last form of legal slavery

/oh the get free room and board
//sounds familiar

Well, and a free education.  Graduating with a degree and zero debt is a hell of a lot than with tends of thousands of debt.

This kid is a kicker for UCF, chances are he's not going to go pro, so the free tuition room and board are a pretty nice deal.

The reasons the NCAA has such strong rules about amateur status and eligibility is because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.  There is a lot of money for a certain cadre of schools, and they've shown they're willing to bend the rules as far as they can to gain an advantage.  In order to maintain some semblance of a level playing field between the haves and have-nots, these rules need to exist.  They do, however, need to be enforced more equally, and schools should be penalized for having a high number of players leave for the draft before graduation, the focus should still be on the student part of student athletes and the system should not act as a de facto minor league.

As far as paying players directly goes, it would destroy the entire college sports system.  Some schools could afford it, most could not, and the Title IX lawsuits would strain even the big-name institutions.  Football, men's basketball, baseball, and hockey are the sports that make money (and in most schools not all of those do).  Aside from UCONN's women's basketball program, I don't believe there's a single profitable women's collegiate sports team.  The profits from the big men's sports go to support all of the women's sports and the lesser-viewed men's sports like wrestling, golf, rowing, track and field, etc.  Those sports allow many more students than play in the prof ...


Actually, I think some colleges have BA's in "Sport and Leisure Studies" that essentially covers pretty much everything you posted - obviously a football player can concentrate on the football relevant courses (play design, coaching), but other sports (basketball, baseball, etc.) could have similar tracks. Plus broadcasting, media interviews, financial management courses could probably be lumped into the COMM or ECON departments.

The hard part is college/university presidents endorsing a full on degree in this across all Division I schools, but hell, video game design is now a college major, which probably 20 years ago would've been laughed out of academia altogether - why not extend it to professional athletics?
 
2017-08-01 12:11:38 PM  
I still don't understand what, exactly, people gain by vehemently defending the NCAA's hilarious policies.

The only thing I can piece together is some sort of deep-seated resentment that they may have to get up on Saturday morning and do something else with their lives if the Bumfark State Fighting Moochers have to pay young men for their profession.
 
2017-08-01 12:17:52 PM  

Mike_LowELL: I still don't understand what, exactly, people gain by vehemently defending the NCAA's hilarious policies.

The only thing I can piece together is some sort of deep-seated resentment that they may have to get up on Saturday morning and do something else with their lives if the Bumfark State Fighting Moochers have to pay young men for their profession.


I'm actually more inclined to kill the moneymaking sports off. Interscholastic sports are awesome, and for most people, a scholarship and the opportunity to travel is great compensation.

Get rid of the for-profit elements in schools.
 
2017-08-01 12:48:55 PM  

JAGChem82: because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.



Go google "confessions of an SEC bagman"

These kids are getting paid, big time. The ncaa is just trying to maintain the illusion

Do you honestly think they would ever hand down a bowl suspension to Alabama or Florida?

You would see a group of southern schools get together and form their own league or conference instantly, pay their players, and take all the television money with them. All the top players would run there and the ncaa schools would become second tier
 
2017-08-01 01:01:12 PM  
The NCAA sucks.  They are attempting to police a highly competitive and lucrative sport with minimal tools to make sure the rules are being followed.  The rules are idiotic, because they are so exploitable otherwise by very wealthy boosters and some schools and would absolute destroy the already tenuous competitive balance.

Here is what I mean.  Lets say they allowed a player to sell paintings they created like any other student.  The QB at Alabama can sell his obviously brilliant stick figure drawings at $10,000 per drawing. The star RB generates quality mix tapes and his own freestyle poetry that goes for $5000 per recording.  Future recruits know that this school has a thriving group of patrons to the arts and will support their artistic talents while they engage in athletics and earn degrees.  Other schools can't compete and it makes it that much easier for many Power 5 conference schools to soar above other schools in recruiting and on the field.

It is obvious that many schools already have methods of illegally funneling cash and other benefits to recruits.  The NCAA tries to stop these behaviors but are simply inadequate in many ways.  That is why so often it is the small schools that get hammered for idiotic violations while more resource rich schools can stonewall and seemingly get away with it. There is no use if making it even easier to funnel money.  The only real solution is to completely separate athletics from schools and implement a minor league system.
 
2017-08-01 01:04:32 PM  

TuteTibiImperes: The reasons the NCAA has such strong rules about amateur status and eligibility is because the big schools have tried to work around them in many creative ways in the past.


They have rules because schools have tried to work around the rules.

TuteTibiImperes: it would destroy the entire college sports system


Good, the current system is idiotic.
 
2017-08-01 01:25:38 PM  
There is not now, nor has there ever been competitive balance in college sports, especially football. The list of national title winners and recruiting class rankings are clear proof of that.
 
2017-08-01 02:25:12 PM  

Daedalus27: The NCAA sucks.  They are attempting to police a highly competitive and lucrative sport with minimal tools to make sure the rules are being followed.  The rules are idiotic, because they are so exploitable otherwise by very wealthy boosters and some schools and would absolute destroy the already tenuous competitive balance.

Here is what I mean.  Lets say they allowed a player to sell paintings they created like any other student.  The QB at Alabama can sell his obviously brilliant stick figure drawings at $10,000 per drawing. The star RB generates quality mix tapes and his own freestyle poetry that goes for $5000 per recording.  Future recruits know that this school has a thriving group of patrons to the arts and will support their artistic talents while they engage in athletics and earn degrees.  Other schools can't compete and it makes it that much easier for many Power 5 conference schools to soar above other schools in recruiting and on the field.

It is obvious that many schools already have methods of illegally funneling cash and other benefits to recruits.  The NCAA tries to stop these behaviors but are simply inadequate in many ways.  That is why so often it is the small schools that get hammered for idiotic violations while more resource rich schools can stonewall and seemingly get away with it. There is no use if making it even easier to funnel money.  The only real solution is to completely separate athletics from schools and implement a minor league system.


Isn't this basically our legal system as a nation? We have a bunch of rules but almost no capability of enforcing them and the wealthy get away with almost anything because they have the resources to fight the law?

BTW, the "art" scheme you described is a violation.

It's not really the NCAA that's the problem (just like, in general, the problem isn't the law). It's the greed/corruption/chipping at the value of the institution involved at every level beneath it and the refusal by anyone to actually play by the rules.
 
2017-08-01 02:26:00 PM  

smerfnablin: Do you honestly think they would ever hand down a bowl suspension to Alabama or Florida?


s1.postimg.org

"In addition to cheating my ass off in the 1996 Citrus Bowl against Ohio State to the point where Athletic Director Douglas Dickey sent a letter of apology I am also a rat. I'll deny it was me every day, thirty times a day, until documents prove I was the rat and I can't lie about it any longer."

"How is my legacy forgotten so easily? Oh no, this is so unfair, guess I'll go drown my sorrows in three tubs of Rocky Road as I cry about how nobody loves or remembers me"
 
2017-08-01 04:03:48 PM  

WoodyHayes: smerfnablin: Do you honestly think they would ever hand down a bowl suspension to Alabama or Florida?

[s1.postimg.org image 217x313]

"In addition to cheating my ass off in the 1996 Citrus Bowl against Ohio State to the point where Athletic Director Douglas Dickey sent a letter of apology I am also a rat. I'll deny it was me every day, thirty times a day, until documents prove I was the rat and I can't lie about it any longer."

"How is my legacy forgotten so easily? Oh no, this is so unfair, guess I'll go drown my sorrows in three tubs of Rocky Road as I cry about how nobody loves or remembers me"


His legacy forgotten so easily?

Did the Fulmer Cup get renamed?
 
2017-08-01 04:04:23 PM  
Did Citrus Bowl get spelled so it doesn't require U-T?
 
2017-08-01 05:23:17 PM  

IAmRight: WoodyHayes: smerfnablin: Do you honestly think they would ever hand down a bowl suspension to Alabama or Florida?

[s1.postimg.org image 217x313]

"In addition to cheating my ass off in the 1996 Citrus Bowl against Ohio State to the point where Athletic Director Douglas Dickey sent a letter of apology I am also a rat. I'll deny it was me every day, thirty times a day, until documents prove I was the rat and I can't lie about it any longer."

"How is my legacy forgotten so easily? Oh no, this is so unfair, guess I'll go drown my sorrows in three tubs of Rocky Road as I cry about how nobody loves or remembers me"

His legacy forgotten so easily?

Did the Fulmer Cup get renamed?


Early Every Day Should Be Saturday is a national treasure, their stuff is still good but they lost some flavor when they were picked up by SB Nation. Not that I blame EDSBS for getting paid because it was theirs and they still have some control of it but it does seem a bit homogenized now. The Fulmer Cup is probably their greatest legacy.
 
Displayed 43 of 43 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report