re: that's why you opt out

quote:

---

It's in another thread. But if you knew how to use the internet you would know you could highlight that text and right click and search Google and it would automagically bring you to that exact article. Amazing!

---

Yes I read it. It was a bullshite ESPN article. But if you are going to quote an article, fricking link it.

It cited taxes on the policy, while pretending the NFL contract doesn't have taxes. That right there should have alerted you that the article was biased.

Then it used the best possible mock draft position to claim he would have made more money than the policy he took out, when the policy amount is based on a realistic draft position.

And then the policy only pays the difference and since he got a NFL contract, didn't pay out the full amount.

So he didn't lose what the article claimed.

Just more ESPN agenda bullshite. Kind of like how they always cite NCAA revenue, but fail to mention the billions that are spent sending 180,000 kids to college every year. They present the revenue as profit to further their agendas.

quote:

---

Ok, whatever you say. Because clearly you arent with a bias here.

---

I'm not posting falsehoods and if I do, feel free to point them out. They are purposely distorting the numbers, not me.

quote:

---

Won't someone think of the poor colleges?

---

Once again, do you know the difference between revenue and profit?

If you make 3 billion a year, but then you also spend 3 billion a year to make it happen, then you don't make a profit. And the NCAA schools spend over 3 billion a year on 180,000 scholarships.

And then when it comes to money from football, basketball etc, that money is put back into the programs. Top of the line facilities, coaching, etc. But even then, a good portion of what is provided actually comes from private donations, and all but about 60 schools operate in the red and can only exist because of private donations.

So again, do you understand the difference between revenue and profit?

If players want a portion of profit, it'll be $0.

If you want to take into account how much of the revenue each player costs on average a year, at Alabama it's about $125,000 per player. That doesn't include coaching and such, just the scholarship + amenities.

quote:

---

Top 20 Most Profitable College Football Programs

The 20 most profitable college football programs made an eye-popping $925 million combined after expenses. The SEC is the leading conference on the field and on the balance sheet, as it has nine schools in the top 20. Of the remaining 11 most profitable programs, there are four from the Big Ten, three from Pac-12, two from the Big-12 and one from the ACC. Here’s the complete list:

Texas – $92 million

Tennessee – $70 million

LSU – $58 million

Michigan – $56 million

Notre Dame – $54 million

Georgia – $50 million

Ohio State – $50 million

Oklahoma – $48 million

Auburn – $47 million

Alabama – $46 million

Oregon – $40 million

Florida State – $39 million

Arkansas – $38 million

Washington – $38 million

Florida – $37 million

Texas A&M – $37 million

Penn State – $36 million

Michigan State – $32 million

USC – $29 million

South Carolina – $28 million

---

I think they're gonna be ok.

quote:

---

If players want a portion of profit, it'll be $0.

---

Well you were only off by 20 to 70 million or so.

quote:

---

That money is not profit, it is used to pay for the sports that do not generate revenue. Which is required in many cases by Title IX for the revenue sports to exist.

---

Sounds like a different problem to me. So you're wrong, football players make the school TONS of money, it's just redistributed somewhere else. Not their fault and not their problem

frick you pussy.

quote:

---

Sounds like a different problem to me. So you're wrong, football players make the school TONS of money, it's just redistributed somewhere else. Not their fault and not their problem

---

Title IX is forced by the government. It's like taxes, it's an expense you have no choice in.

Also, those numbers usually include donations, and many times the money is used to upgrade facilities and/or pay back on loans previously taken out to pay for such things.

quote:

---

So exactly what I said, not their fault or problem.

It's odd how super conservative people are so pro-socialism when it comes to sports.

This is not really any different than the boomer schtick of "stay at the same job and be loyal to your company." Enjoy your less than 5% raises and never making any real progress that way.

The ship sailed on these foolish beliefs years ago. Don't know why people still try to clutch them.

---

I'm not a big fan of Title IX, but that is what it is. It's a socialist law, so it's kind of weird that you are talking about super conservatives wanting it. Quite the opposite.

However, Sports/Football is not the government. There is absolutely nothing wrong with people coming together of their own free will and sharing resources and/or applying rules to themselves for competitive reasons. That's not socialism, that's freedom.

quote:

---

so it's kind of weird that you are talking about super conservatives wanting it

---

You just based part of your argument on other sports needing football to survive.

quote:

---

However, Sports/Football is not the government. There is absolutely nothing wrong with people coming together of their own free will and sharing resources and/or applying rules to themselves for competitive reasons

---

Just like there's nothing wrong with individuals deciding that doesn't benefit them any longer. Thank you for proving my point.

I'm well aware of what it is. I'm also well aware you used it as a talking point when it suited your agenda.

quote:

---

You just don't want people to tell it like it is and call them quitters for quitting.

---

This is so stupid. Do you still work the same job you had when you were 16? If not, then you're just as much a quitter as they are. How do you not see how stupid that is? That company invested time and money in you too and you just quit on them when it benefitted you. How selfish.

I'm not liberal but ok. You just perfectly illustrated why trying to call them a quitter as a pejorative is dumb as shite when everyone thats calling them that is also a quitter.

So not only are you a quitter, you're also a hypocrite.