Recruiting Forum Football Talk II

Status
Not open for further replies.
College isn't a market place. That's where the argument truly loses itself. These are student athletes. They're supposed to be there for education. Why even go to class if you can have a career playing college ball? This isn't big business we're talking about. It's freaking school.

Well why is it every other student at the age of 18 (even those on academic scholarships) can go out in the workforce WHILE attending the university? Really the question is how does a sports scholarship have the ability to cripple an adult from making any sort of money?
 
giphy.gif
google the 1942 case Wickard v Filburn.
 
What about the fact California is the 5th largest economy in the world (yeah WORLD, not country)? Sports = money, it's one of the best investments in the world. It's why 19 teams professionally are in California, ya'll can have whatever opinions you want on the "quality" of the product, but if any state wanted to pull out of the NCAA this is it.
Economy is a LARGE ****show. Coupled with the $15 hr minimum wage and the heavy taxes on everything. This isn’t going to make them any more self reliant.
 
Maybe that’s where you and I differ - I don’t care about “college football” - I care about the workforce being adequately compensated for its time and labor.

The system is corrupt and needs to be corrected.

It's not a workforce. Students don't pay taxes for their scholarship. As Weezer stated, I have no issue paying athletes a stipend, even if it's much more than they get now. But, it's not a workforce. The high level schools pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to provide facilities, medical treatment, nutrition, conditioning, lounges, apparel, and food on top of the education.

It's a divisive subject, and I understand the argument on both sides. But there are plenty of professional jobs that you can't just step into at the age of 18 and do it.
 
Well why is it every other student at the age of 18 (even those on academic scholarships) can go out in the workforce WHILE attending the university? Really the question is how does a sports scholarship have the ability to cripple an adult from making any sort of money?
Read back. I said I supported paying players a set stipend. Something fair and even. I do not support the idea of unlimited payments and endorsements that favors larger schools with big money boosters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeredblooded
Read back. I said I supported paying players a set stipend. Something fair and even. I do not support the idea of unlimited payments and endorsements that favors larger schools with big money boosters.
Anything involving the school itself will have title IX issues and small schools will have to get rid of either all or certain sports which means less scholarships for students if that stipend is too much. They also get stipends now.
 
It's not a workforce. Students don't pay taxes for their scholarship. As Weezer stated, I have no issue paying athletes a stipend, even if it's much more than they get now. But, it's not a workforce. The high level schools pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to provide facilities, medical treatment, nutrition, conditioning, lounges, apparel, and food on top of the education.

It's a divisive subject, and I understand the argument on both sides. But there are plenty of professional jobs that you can't just step into at the age of 18 and do it.

I don't follow the logic here? Most of these athletes have 4-12 years of experience in the profession before ever setting foot on a college campus, some have paid thousands of dollars to invest in specialist related skilled training.

I guess I don't think the "it's not a workforce" is a valid argument. It's an unpaid workforce, which one could argue at the HS level is child labor even. But athletes are doing a job, it is work. And currently they are simply being paid through different means than direct wages. The argument is that no other workforce has legal ability to prevent you from making money outside of that career.

Even military personnel have the ability to work additionally outside the armed forces for profit.
 
That's a question for the NFL, not colleges. Keep college sports strictly amateur. Allow athletes to turn pro anytime they want.

I don't hate that either, I actually think baseball does it best. Can enter the draft and even get drafted, if you decide you'd rather go the college route then you still can. And then the college has a bit of protection knowing you can't just reenter the draft after a year or two.
 
I don’t understand why the Olympic model wouldn’t work in college athletics. Sure, there’s an advantage for some schools, but these schools with big boosters already have this advantage. It seems like a capitalism vs. socialism argument, and proponents of the current situation are more afraid of change/things being “unfair” than anything else.

The fact that someone can’t make money on their signature/picture/name is somewhat mind boggling to me. This still protects the school’s/ncaa’s profits and seems like the most realistic middle ground moving forward.
 
I don't hate that either, I actually think baseball does it best. Can enter the draft and even get drafted, if you decide you'd rather go the college route then you still can. And then the college has a bit of protection knowing you can't just reenter the draft after a year or two.
I've always thought that method would be best for the nba and nfl too and would help the ncaa avoid the top players making money issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols
Also small schools make lots of money. TTU for example, even with students getting into games free and the program only winning a single game last season their worse home attendance was 4400 people. Even at $10 a ticket that's 44k for a single game. Tickets are more than $10 and a portion of the crowd got in free, but then you have concession sales as well.

Small schools will still field teams because people will still pay to watch sports and not everyone wants to travel to big cities to do so.
Heck, this could really help small schools out.

Think about the money some alumni of Liberty, Vandy, small-Florida-school-youve-never-heard-of have. They could pluck some high $ recruits from bigger schools with a direct payment from a fan. Basketball could be even crazier since a single player can affect the success of a team in March.
 
I don't follow the logic here? Most of these athletes have 4-12 years of experience in the profession before ever setting foot on a college campus, some have paid thousands of dollars to invest in specialist related skilled training.

I guess I don't think the "it's not a workforce" is a valid argument. It's an unpaid workforce, which one could argue at the HS level is child labor even. But athletes are doing a job, it is work. And currently they are simply being paid through different means than direct wages. The argument is that no other workforce has legal ability to prevent you from making money outside of that career.

Even military personnel have the ability to work additionally outside the armed forces for profit.

Look at it legally. “Everyone” pays taxes on income. I say it loosely because not everyone files tax returns, which is illegal. The compensation that students receive is not taxable because it’s a benefit from a scholarship. It’s not a workforce.
 
The good news is that the bball team is about to land Springer and have the #1 ranked class in the country. We gonna be good in bball for a while.

I think as long as Barnes is here (especially after getting paid) we'll be pushing Kentucky to win the SEC almost yearly. I'm not sure if we can reload as well as they can if we start having the 1 & done attrition though. But maybe we can have a good balance of guys willing to play 3 vs 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BennesseeVols
I've always thought that method would be best for the nba and nfl too and would help the ncaa avoid the top players making money issue.

The bad thing is it would require the NBA/NFL to agree/get on board. I think the NBA would have no issue with it. The NFL though is the hard sell...
 
  • Like
Reactions: RikidyBones
Do these schools spend so much money on athletics because they love having future alumni or is it because people spend a lot of money to watch football? In the words of Cardale Jones, “we ain’t come here to play school.”

We can have a conversation about why the United States has “amateur athletics” in the first place and why those athletics are tied to higher education institutions. If you think about it, it’s truly a weird system we’ve built that has no real comparison across the country.

Take England and Spain for example - soccer is the dominant sport, obviously, in those countries. If you have a kid - say he’s 10 - who looks to be a promising athlete - those clubs sign him to a youth deal, pay him to practice and retain his rights, and put him through school up until his 18th birthday. That’s the standard - not our system.
This is true. And it's a fantastic system that Europe has. Over there, the athletes are fan-funded from the top-down. Here, its athlete-funded from the bottom to college. Then it's fan-funded in the pros. Results in usually only rich kids getting a real shot at becoming a professional (with the exception of basketball and some football - but it's caused the backdoor corruption we have an issue with).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement



Back
Top