quote:
For one thing, the Universities have a monopoly on College Football. They set the price for what the Players get from a scholarship. If there was competition from another organization, that price would be a lot higher. The NCAA falls under the guise of an amateur organization, they list athletes that way so they can justify not paying the players at a market rate, based on claiming they are just like other students.

For one thing, you are wrong.
College kids play college kids.
High school kids play high school kids.
Middle school kids play middle school kids.

If you are setting a value on these kids as athletes, you are fooling yourself because that value is only relevant to the level of football that they play in.
If they move up, they offer little to no value.

The entire idea of market value is BS because it is only relevant to who they play. That is why the NFL doesn't want to babysit teenagers. The same for the CFL.

If there is only one reason why these kids hold value and that value is amateur athletics, then they can choose to play amateur athletics or not.

And they choose to because it covers education. Covers room and board. Covers healthcare. They get stipends for cost of attending. They get stipends for living off campus. They can get other grants and subsidies reserved for college students. Unlike any college student outside of the military academies, they are not hurting for cash (unless they don't know how to spend).

This post was edited on 1/24/18 at 4:32 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Irons Puppet

Birmingham

Member since Jun 2009

25901 posts

Posted on 1/24/18 at 5:03 pm to meansonny

quote:
If you are setting a value on these kids as athletes, you are fooling yourself because that value is only relevant to the level of football that they play in.

First of all, the competition and skills increases as they move up each level. The market value for a HS player may be a good lay after the game Friday night. Are fans going to pay $125 per ticket or is TV going to put major production cost in showing these games ? No because the level of skills has establish the market value for these players as low.

As the system culls the poorer athletes at the next level (College Football), the market value of these player increase due to increased demand for TV and Ticket revenue. Then the culling really kicks in at the highest level which results in the largest market value for the players.

quote:
The entire idea of market value is BS because it is only relevant to who they play. That is why the NFL doesn't want to babysit teenagers. The same for the CFL.

Tell that to the NBA or MLB.

quote:
And they choose to because it covers education. Covers room and board. Covers healthcare. They get stipends for cost of attending. They get stipends for living off campus. They can get other grants and subsidies reserved for college students. Unlike any college student outside of the military academ

Tell us what these stipends pay for and then tell us how much is left over after all the costs are added up. Then compare those cost to Universities profit from Football and Basketball (P5). How many of these kids are sending some of that money home to help their families ? Yes, these kids have it made.

Every one of these Players that will not play Pro Sports would be better off joining the Military and taking advantage of the benefits they give Serviceman today (Education, room and Board, Healthcare and a stipend). The risk for war are going to be about the same for the longterm risks of CTE before it is over. At least the VA/DOD acknowledges those risks and tries to compensate for them.

This post was edited on 1/24/18 at 5:04 pm

2 ...

Report Post

SEC Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board