re: Boston globe article on Gurley situation

quote:

---

Right, so it might happen that way at first, but after a donor watches seven of his ten $100K investments bust on the field, he would stop, provided he is rational.

---

Why would he stop? He has the same odds of success as donors for every other top program. If anything, the more money you spend relative to everyone else, the greater your odds of buying successful talent. That's what drives the cheating that happens already in cfb. It's a risk, but people still take risks. They spend hundreds of billions per year on various forms of "investments" with returns based on entertainment value. Some donate to the local opera or dance company, helping them hire (hopefully) better performers. Some spend $50 million on high tech sailboats to run in the America's cup, or a balloon to sail around the world. Some blow millions in Las Vegas at the craps tables, for entertainment with a net negative return. Some buy expensive cars that depreciate in value over time. Money will be spent on paying top players, in very large quantities and it will have a big impact on recruiting.

quote:

---

they're not talking about letting boosters pay recruits. They're talking about letting players market themselves.

---

Suppose the booster owns a local business? Is he prevented from participating. What if he's a memorabilia collector; is he forbidden from collecting signed jerseys? Can he buy them from third parties? This can't be effectively regulated, and it will have a huge impact on recruiting and talent distribution.