Started By
Message
re: Bill introduced in MO legislature that would void scholarships
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:30 pm to sms151t
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:30 pm to sms151t
quote:
Because if it is only Athletic Scholarships then it is discrimination.
They pull the scholarships if they don't play football.
If your grades are slacking you lose academic scholarships. Where's the discrimination?
2
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:30 pm to scrooster
quote:Exactly. The first time they revoke scholarships will be the end of Mizzou as a football or basketball program. At that point they will be useless and kicked out of the SEC.
Just imagine the conversations sitting at the tables with the mommies of recruits. Mizzou will be easy pickins' for the Big 12, B1G, SEC, etc.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:35 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
This legislation may also grant the AD the right to terminate a head coach "for cause" if he fails to take action (which means, no buyout).
Would be sweet to have half of your team dismissed, take a job somewhere else and transfer in the best of your team and dismiss 30-50 of the worst players on your new team.
"oh, you're going to fire me for supporting my players? We're all going to the next stop and winning a championship."
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:39 pm to johnzorback
They NCAA would find a way to frick over the coach and players in that situation
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:40 pm to MontyFranklyn
Link to MO House HB 1743
This post was edited on 12/14/15 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:43 pm to Crimsonpanther13
quote:
They pull the scholarships if they don't play football.
If your grades are slacking you lose academic scholarships. Where's the discrimination?
First of all, They're still technically playing football because they haven't been dismissed from the team. Even if they go on a strike for a week, don't go to class, games etc., if HC doesn't dismiss them.
Second, there's no law about striking while receiving an academic scholarship. If students on academic scholarship strike for a week, don't go to class, etc., but keep their 3.5 or 4.0 gpa they're still on scholarship.
This means someone on an academic scholarship can strike and still receive scholarship whereas a football player can't, even though he he was never dismissed from the team.
TLDR: they can always pull scholarships, this is about government puling a HC's players without the AD or HC's consent.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:45 pm to Crimsonpanther13
quote:
Where's the discrimination?
I don't think you even read the sentence you quoted.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 1:46 pm to scrooster
What will those conversations be exactly?
Odom landed a 4* LB with an offer a list a mile long within a week of getting the job.
I know you are wishing it will have long term implications, but it's been non news for a long time now.
Maybe this will dredge it back up, or maybe people won't really care. Who knows...
Odom landed a 4* LB with an offer a list a mile long within a week of getting the job.
I know you are wishing it will have long term implications, but it's been non news for a long time now.
Maybe this will dredge it back up, or maybe people won't really care. Who knows...
Posted on 12/14/15 at 2:44 pm to RD Dawg
quote:
Yes,but it can be argued that funds used (at least for CFB scholarships ) do not come from the state...
The funds most certainly do come from the state. They may not come from taxpayers, but once an institution takes in money from any source...including ticket sales, donations, TV money, whatever...that money becomes institution money...and since it is a state institution, state money.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 2:51 pm to JesusQuintana
quote:
Wouldn't it need to be proven that the state subsidized the scholarships for them to have any power to revoke them?
No.
Once the school takes in revenue from any source, that revenue becomes school money. And the school is a state institution controlled by state government.
I was researching a Title IX issue today...equity in post season awards. Boys and girls basketball teams win the state championship. The boys get rings and the girls get T shirts. The school argues that, since boosters donated the money to pay for the rings and not the school, there is no Title IX violation. The school loses, because the law says that once the school gets the money, it becomes school money.
Bottom line...whenever the school takes in money from any source, it becomes school money...which in this case is a state institution.
This post was edited on 12/14/15 at 2:52 pm
Posted on 12/14/15 at 2:55 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
The funds most certainly do come from the state. They may not come from taxpayers, but once an institution takes in money from any source...including ticket sales, donations, TV money, whatever...that money becomes institution money...and since it is a state institution, state money.
Does that mean the state of Louisiana could raid LSU coffers if they needed to?
Posted on 12/14/15 at 3:01 pm to Socratics
quote:
Does that mean the state of Louisiana could raid LSU coffers if they needed to?
That would depend on the laws of the State of Louisiana.
From a practical sense, probably not. But it does give the State of Louisiana very broad discretion...responsibility, actually...over policies governing the use of those funds.
This post was edited on 12/14/15 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 12/14/15 at 3:01 pm to JesusQuintana
Wow what a bitch move by Missouri politicians
Posted on 12/14/15 at 3:11 pm to JesusQuintana
get that piece of garbage out of the SEC.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 3:27 pm to KaiserSoze99
quote:
If I were the MO legislature, I would also add civil and criminal penalties to the law.
Make it decidedly against their interest to hold a multimillion dollar entity hostage to assert a liberal agenda (or any non-athletic agenda). Missouri basically had no choice but to get the pres to resign, even if he was faultless and a good president. Everyone but the poopstika gang lost control of one of the largest entities in the state of Missouri. They effectively circumvented the hiring and retention process of a state institution as well as the legislative and elective process. That cannot happen.
How much did their strike cost the University of Missouri? Can it be quantified?
Somebody needs to pay for that shite
Civil and Criminal Penalties against whom? The Players (You might well give up sports), The Coaches (What coach would take this job)
quote:
How much did their strike cost the University of Missouri? Can it be quantified?
Somebody needs to pay for that shite.
The football players aren't employees and the Coaches can only do so much to convince them to play.
Their is a part of me that wants to see the Missouri players strike to oppose this bill just to see what will happen. If they got rid of 3/4 the team automatically because of this bill, The State and the University lose by default. Football subsidizes like every other sport except basketball. You would stand by your principles but lose absolutely everything.
I bet the NCAA would let the players transfer and play immediately.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 3:39 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
and since its a state institution it's the states money
UGA Athletic Association is a private entity that raises money for UGA athletics and the state is most certainly NOT entitled to those funds.There's an entire board including a treasurer who oversees and invest and disperses those funds.
Complete horseshite.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 4:10 pm to RD Dawg
I just read that athletic scholarships are paid purely through TSF with no outside contributions.
This bill has no chance of passing.
This bill has no chance of passing.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 4:11 pm to JesusQuintana
Government over reach. Republicans love that crap tho
Posted on 12/14/15 at 4:17 pm to Socratics
quote:Bingo! For some reason no one is thinking about what is going to happen in the long run. If the reason for striking is a race issue and black football players are kicked off the team more than likely the black basketball players will leave too. The only thing that can hurt the players is if the NCAA fricks it up somehow punishing the players.
The State and the University lose by default. Football subsidizes like every other sport except basketball. You would stand by your principles but lose absolutely everything.
I bet the NCAA would let the players transfer and play immediately.
Posted on 12/14/15 at 4:19 pm to BamaGradinTn
quote:
The funds most certainly do come from the state. They may not come from taxpayers, but once an institution takes in money from any source...including ticket sales, donations, TV money, whatever...that money becomes institution money...and since it is a state institution, state money.
No the frick its not. 
Page 5 of 7
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News