NCAA Amateurism to Go Back Under Courtroom Spotlight in Jenkins Trial

[SCBlueLiner]

You are talking about making rules for the 1% when the NCAA should be concerned about the 99%. The 1%, the top athletes, there is the issue of money, compensation, endorsements, money under the table etc. Those are not issues for the 99%.

 

[Newsworthy]

You are talking about making rules for the 1% when the NCAA should be concerned about the 99%. The 1%, the top athletes, there is the issue of money, compensation, endorsements, money under the table etc. Those are not issues for the 99%.

Not true. Every single athlete in college should be free to sign endorsement deals make or female.
If you think companies will only gravitate to star players than that is sad and maybe the NCAA can address that issue.
A lot of the money that is used for the 99% as you say is generated by the 1%

 

[LeHab]

Opening the door to private school unions for players would have been an interesting step but so far was defeated:

College athlete unionization is dead. For now

 

[KevFu]

Not true. Every single athlete in college should be free to sign endorsement deals make or female.
If you think companies will only gravitate to star players than that is sad and maybe the NCAA can address that issue.
A lot of the money that is used for the 99% as you say is generated by the 1%

They are free to do so... they just can't play after they do.

The issue isn't "Oh, we can't let 1% of the athletes get paid and 99% of them not get paid."

The NCAA's stance is based on recruiting and a level playing field. It creates a situation where THE Official car dealer of Ohio State athletics gives every single athlete at Ohio State a free luxury car lease while they're on scholarship, so Ohio State can out-recruit everyone and win on the field.

All the NCAA rules are what they are because they want the easiest way of making sure each school can only offer a recruit as close to the exact same thing as possible. (And that's why paying the athletes X dollars in addition to their scholarship/cost of attendance won't stop illegal recruiting. Because someone will offer X+Y to get the biggest recruits to go to their favorite school).

 

[Newsworthy]

They are free to do so... they just can't play after they do.

The issue isn't "Oh, we can't let 1% of the athletes get paid and 99% of them not get paid."

The NCAA's stance is based on recruiting and a level playing field. It creates a situation where THE Official car dealer of Ohio State athletics gives every single athlete at Ohio State a free luxury car lease while they're on scholarship, so Ohio State can out-recruit everyone and win on the field.

All the NCAA rules are what they are because they want the easiest way of making sure each school can only offer a recruit as close to the exact same thing as possible. (And that's why paying the athletes X dollars in addition to their scholarship/cost of attendance won't stop illegal recruiting. Because someone will offer X+Y to get the biggest recruits to go to their favorite school).

The issue should be about education. Education first period. Colleges were built so that students can learn at a higher level and not to enter the NBA or NFL.
Somewhere along the line that got lost. These colleges could care less about education and College Sports is now just big business.
Big business where the ones selling the tickets are grossly uncompensated.
There is no level playing field and never was that is why we continuously see the same programs in the rankings year after year. The colleges with the most high profile coaches get the best players. The colleges with the best facilities, best fields, winnigest programs, biggest endorsement deals and best TV contracts get the best players. And of course the teams that continually bribe players.

 

[KevFu]

The issue should be about education. Education first period. Colleges were built so that students can learn at a higher level and not to enter the NBA or NFL.
Somewhere along the line that got lost. These colleges could care less about education and College Sports is now just big business.
Big business where the ones selling the tickets are grossly uncompensated.
There is no level playing field and never was that is why we continuously see the same programs in the rankings year after year. The colleges with the most high profile coaches get the best players. The colleges with the best facilities, best fields, winnigest programs, biggest endorsement deals and best TV contracts get the best players. And of course the teams that continually bribe players.

They're not mutually exclusive things. (And in many cases, sports INCREASES the academic standards of the University -- for example, Gonzaga).

Should colleges care about education and spend to fund the best educational policies that exist? Of course.

But the money that athletics spends is mostly created by athletics. It's not a case of "Supply of University dollars" are being wasted on athletics." College Athletics spends large amounts of money because the DEMAND for the product exists, enabling these athletic departments to operate that way.

And all those things you mention about the playing field not being level proves it:

Who are the teams always in the polls? BCS teams, from the "Power Conferences." They didn't get that way by saying "Screw academics, sports is all that matters." There’s 60 AAU members and 32 are BCS schools. Like Duke, and Stanford, and Michigan, Florida, etc.

They have the elaborate facilities, the high paid coaches, the high athletics budgets... because TV Networks and Shoe Companies want to showcase their sports.

Kids at school wanted to play sports in their spare time. They organized teams and played other schools. Alums were really interested in "My school can beat your school." Rules were put in place to prevent schools from bringing in ringers. They had to be academically eligible, actual full-time students (those standards are higher than the student-body as a whole, by the way. You CAN graduate from college with a D+ average. You can't play NCAA sports with a D+ average)....

And the general public loved it so much they followed it immensely, bought tickets, and TV wanted to put the games on. Shoe companies wanted to outfit the teams. You can't roll that back because the nation isn't going to stop caring about their alma mater and sports. Period.

Colleges have athletics departments because the interest is so high, you can make revenue. And you use that revenue to spread the publicity, which is good for the school. And it also gives kids a free education, which is excellent compensation for them.

All the shadiness in BCS -- is basically limited to the BCS, not the other 278 Division I schools -- is because the dollar amounts got so high. No one would have any problems with the NCAA system if the 1984 lawsuit between schools and the NCAA over TV rights didn't give billions of dollars to seven of the 32 conferences. If all the TV money was split 353 ways, the budgets would be under control, the playing field would be level and no one would up in arms.

But people ONLY see the schools from the BCS on TV, and they think all of NCAA sports is that. It's not.

 

[Newsworthy]

"The money that athletics spends is mostly created by athletics"
Spend?
What about how much money the University profits from the amount they spend?
The "Demand" for the products exist because the entertainment is first rate.
It's the level of talent that creates the demand.

And the athletic facilities on many of these Division 1 schools rival NBA and NFL teams. And that means that the volleyball player and the star QB get the same opportunity even though we know who is creating this revenue. And when I mean the same opportunity I mean a free education. The only exception nobody cares if the volleyball player can't pass Economics 101. They won't let the star QB fail.
Not to mention these coaches are paid like the pros which as we know is also unnecessary except for the fact that this is huge business. Let's call a spade a spade. This is about money and not education and it never was.
And because of these huge TV deals, endorsements, and what not it opens things up for uneven playing fields with high levels of corruption.
These colleges choose to spend this money. The reason behind it is obvious. That's why they get the best. And why do you think Sports increases the academic standards?
Because it generates millions and millions of dollars. So Professor can make high salaries also and so can every employee of the college. And most employees of colleges can send their kids to school for free or at discounted rates. And kids who are good academically can get scholarships. Or good at music. But none of these people make the university money.

Plenty of these high profile student athletes are catered to in order to pass class. The requirements are also lowered to be considered a student athlete. Dexter Manley for instance graduated college and won a Super Bowl and admitted he could not read.
What does that tell you?

 

[mouser]

Dexter Manley for instance graduated college and won a Super Bowl and admitted he could not read.

What does that tell you?

It tells me the school willfully ignored their obligation to educate the student athelete.

It doesn’t tell me the “solution” is Oklahoma State should have been paying Manley for playing. Though they probably were anyways.

 

[Fugu]

It tells me the school willfully ignored their obligation to educate the student athelete.

It doesn’t tell me the “solution” is Oklahoma State should have been paying Manley for playing. Though they probably were anyways.

Isn't that beyond oversimplifying it? Guys who cannot read should be back in grade school, not getting top promotion for the NFL at a university.

 

[Killion]

Isn't that beyond oversimplifying it? Guys who cannot read should be back in grade school, not getting top promotion for the NFL at a university.

.... mindblowing. makes a total mockery of the institutions, education....
.... no doubt handed degree's, diplomas as well.... absolutely pathetic....

 

[BKIslandersFan]

It tells me the school willfully ignored their obligation to educate the student athelete.

It doesn’t tell me the “solution” is Oklahoma State should have been paying Manley for playing. Though they probably were anyways.

The solution is to separate player development from education and then pay the said players.

But that's me.

 

[Newsworthy]

ESPN ran an interesting article on Duke basketball player Wendell Carter. Carter's a one and done.
Carter's mom was a college athlete herself. She compared the NCAA stance to slavery.
Now I think that's a way but too much still u can't disagree with her passion in the issue at hand. She talked about education and how that's really non existent. All about using these player /students for the obvious. Saying that a free education hardly equates the amount of money the college generates.
She was asked to Public speak and seemed to come off as genuine. Very gutsy on her part. Definitely has my respect.
I can't help agree with her on many of her views.

 

[KevFu]

"The money that athletics spends is mostly created by athletics"
Spend?
What about how much money the University profits from the amount they spend?

Zero profit. Athletics departments are non-profit entities. What they bring in gets re-invested. You build a new facility so you generate more revenue, which you use to build another facility for another sport so you can generate more revenue there… it’s an endless cycle…

(and it’s no different than the University side, which fundraises and advertises and builds stuff to lure the best applicants they can get, so they can pick and choose the best ones, and raise tuition and fundraise and advertise and build stuff to lure the best applicants they can get, so they can pick and choose the best ones. Lather, rinse, repeat.)

The "Demand" for the products exist because the entertainment is first rate.
It's the level of talent that creates the demand.

That’s pretty much non-sense, as I’ve basically proven time and time again on this site.

Matt Forte might make the NFL Hall of Fame. He played in front of 12,000 fans per game at Tulane. A lesser running back at Alabama played in front of 93,000 fans per game.

The individual talents are interchangeable. Tulane draws 12,000 because they get one Matt Forte, and Alabama’s roster is 100 deep of blue-chip prospects.

But who those prospects actually ARE doesn’t matter.

And the athletic facilities on many of these Division 1 schools rival NBA and NFL teams.
And that means that the volleyball player and the star QB get the same opportunity even though we know who is creating this revenue. And when I mean the same opportunity I mean a free education. The only exception nobody cares if the volleyball player can't pass Economics 101. They won't let the star QB fail.
Not to mention these coaches are paid like the pros which as we know is also unnecessary except for the fact that this is huge business. Let's call a spade a spade. This is about money and not education and it never was.
And because of these huge TV deals, endorsements, and what not it opens things up for uneven playing fields with high levels of corruption.
These colleges choose to spend this money. The reason behind it is obvious. That's why they get the best. And why do you think Sports increases the academic standards?
Because it generates millions and millions of dollars. So Professor can make high salaries also and so can every employee of the college. And most employees of colleges can send their kids to school for free or at discounted rates. And kids who are good academically can get scholarships. Or good at music. But none of these people make the university money.

Plenty of these high profile student athletes are catered to in order to pass class. The requirements are also lowered to be considered a student athlete. Dexter Manley for instance graduated college and won a Super Bowl and admitted he could not read.
What does that tell you?

Once again you’re equating a couple dozen BCS schools with ALL OF COLLEGE ATHLETICS.

The BCS has way too much money. The BCS is totally corrupt.

You don’t “fix” that by letting the BCS run wild buying players, and force out of Division I the other 275 schools who are actually doing what they’re supposed to be doing (educating kids, playing by the rules and trying their best to compete).

 

[Big Z Man 1990]

ESPN ran an interesting article on Duke basketball player Wendell Carter. Carter's a one and done.
Carter's mom was a college athlete herself. She compared the NCAA stance to slavery.
Now I think that's a way but too much still u can't disagree with her passion in the issue at hand. She talked about education and how that's really non existent. All about using these player /students for the obvious. Saying that a free education hardly equates the amount of money the college generates.
She was asked to Public speak and seemed to come off as genuine. Very gutsy on her part. Definitely has my respect.
I can't help agree with her on many of her views.

I agree with her on the slavery part. As far as I'm concerned Abraham Lincoln's efforts to end slavery were in vain.

 

[sandysan]

.... mindblowing. makes a total mockery of the institutions, education....
.... no doubt handed degree's, diplomas as well.... absolutely pathetic....

in the case of north carolina , the NCAA had no problem with it.

That is what is truly pathetic, the argument that because some non athletes took no work courses means that it wasn't just athletes whop benefited then that means its perfectly fine or not for them to condemn.

 

[golfortennis]

.... mindblowing. makes a total mockery of the institutions, education....
.... no doubt handed degree's, diplomas as well.... absolutely pathetic....

Never understood why the fact a guy can get to the quarterback means he has to go through a charade of calculus class.

 

[tucker3434]

For college football and basketball I get the argument. There really aren’t any options for an 18 year old than college. But for hockey there are options. If you don’t like the NCAA deal, don’t go.