Started By
Message
re: Arian Foster admits to taking money at UT
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to sbrian3915
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
No, its worse than that...he was comapring it to the Civil War.
0
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to IAmReality
quote:
I don't think universities should pay players. I think players should be able to go do their own thing (signing with agents, doing commercials, doing autograph signings, etc.)
This is the Olympic model. The old Olympic model was like the NCAA, players couldn't take money in any way, but the Olympics found that impossible to enforce and outdated and they scrapped it.
The NCAA needs to adopt the Olympic amateurism model. The Universities themselves do not pay the players. Players can independently on their own go make revenue if they have the ability to and so choose.
it's an absolute no brainer.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to lsutothetop
quote:
Look at the revenue brought in by the 85 guys on scholarship and look at the total amount of aid those 85 scholarships add up to. Athletes aren't getting anything close to fair market value.
First off, how much on average would you say in "compensation" are football players getting?
Second, how many Teams/AD's do you think operate with enough profit to pay all players?
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
How come the schools and conferences making money suddenly became a bad thing?
"Oh my god, whatever we do, we can't generate any revenue. That would be horrible"
I'm not saying it's horrible to generate revenue. I'm saying it's horrible for administrators and NCAA executives to be swimming around in money while acting like they are doing amateur athletes a favor.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
How come the schools and conferences making money suddenly became a bad thing?
"Oh my god, whatever we do, we can't generate any revenue. That would be horrible"
It's not, but that argument applies to college athletes too. Why is it bad for players to make money? (or in this specific case, more money, given their value added to the school)
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
Wow. Talk about inappropriate comparisons. That's way over the line, dude.
Slavery may be a bit over the line, but I would say that, given the profits made by the various schools, organizations, entities and individuals, it does border on exploitation.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:27 pm to IAmReality
quote:
I don't think universities should pay players. I think players should be able to go do their own thing (signing with agents, doing commercials, doing autograph signings, etc.)
This is the Olympic model. The old Olympic model was like the NCAA, players couldn't take money in any way, but the Olympics found that impossible to enforce and outdated and they scrapped it.
The NCAA needs to adopt the Olympic amateurism model. The Universities themselves do not pay the players. Players can independently on their own go make revenue if they have the ability to and so choose.
And you think that if they allowed that that the schools and its boosters would keep away and let the money flow freely without any influence from them?
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:28 pm to IAmReality
quote:
The NCAA needs to adopt the Olympic amateurism model. The Universities themselves do not pay the players. Players can independently on their own go make revenue if they have the ability to and so choose.
Dumb. That just allows boosters to buy players. Completely tilts the playing field which goes against everything college athletics is about.
Time to take the money OUT of college athletics. Stop making academic exceptions for athletes. Allow only real students into colleges. The fans won't disappear. Limit construction budgets, facilities, etc. to a level every school within a competitive division can equally compete.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:29 pm to scrooster
quote:
The question is, do you?
The obvious answer is obviously not.
Im not the one who thought the civil war was about taxation without representation.
So, nice try, but fail.
Not surprising coming from a southerner.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:29 pm to GoBigOrange86
quote:
I'm not saying it's horrible to generate revenue. I'm saying it's horrible for administrators and NCAA executives to be swimming around in money while acting like they are doing amateur athletes a favor.
Free college education? Free showcase for the better players to show their skills to the NFL. I'd call that a friggin gift.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:29 pm to notsince98
quote:
Dumb. That just allows boosters to buy players. Completely tilts the playing field which goes against everything college athletics is about.
Oh man, if we pay players only big time schools like Ohio State and Alabama and LSU will win the games!
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:29 pm to lsutothetop
quote:
It's not, but that argument applies to college athletes too. Why is it bad for players to make money? (or in this specific case, more money, given their value added to the school)
What kind of money do you think the players should be paid? Keep in mind that the LSU football program PROFITS around $50 million per year.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:29 pm to PropJoe
quote:
What war do you think?
Answering a question with a question is the surest sign of dumbfrickness that I know of ... well, maybe next to using the analogy that you attempted to use to support your contention.
Just stop posting for awhile - it's embarrassing, what you are doing.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:30 pm to cyde
quote:
Slavery may be a bit over the line, but I would say that, given the profits made by the various schools, organizations, entities and individuals, it does border on exploitation.
I don't care. The slavery comparison is about as inappropriate a thing I have ever seen on the SEC Rant, and there has been some total bull shite on here.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:30 pm to scrooster
Love that he blackmailed Fulmer into buying him 50 tacos.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:31 pm to scrooster
quote:
Answering a question with a question is the surest sign of dumbfrickness that I know of
What I said was quite clear. I thought at least.
I will make sure to explain everything for you slow southern folk from here on out
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:31 pm to PropJoe
You sure are one stupid frick.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:31 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
I don't care. The slavery comparison is about as inappropriate a thing I have ever seen on the SEC Rant, and there has been some total bull shite on here.
Yeah, it's pretty fricked. I'm not denying that. I'm making a different comparison.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:32 pm to PropJoe
quote:
PropJoe
So, since the Alabama fans have expelled you, now you drag down the Notre Dame fans.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 1:32 pm to Crompdaddy8
I'm all for paying players, provided we have them attend a mandatory class every semester or year to teach them about budgeting and how to save/spend.
Dispersion of cash should also be like that of a large company. Give the players a card with a $2000 limit per semester say and have an outside accounting firm (or school based if you can trust them) approve/not approve their purchases.
Dispersion of cash should also be like that of a large company. Give the players a card with a $2000 limit per semester say and have an outside accounting firm (or school based if you can trust them) approve/not approve their purchases.
Page 7 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News