Bye Kansas Basketball

[n_huffhines]

Life is relative. We are reasonably discussing getting the most egregious offenders out of the way. Everyone else's feelings and opinions about how much student-athletes, of all sports, get paid under the table can continue as normal.

These Kansas players in question were not going straight to the NBA. They're not even in the NBA now. What egregious offenders are you talking about?

 

[OleRockyTop]

Sounds like Kansas is going to get the same treatment

 

[TUSKtimes]

These Kansas players in question were not going straight to the NBA. They're not even in the NBA now. What egregious offenders are you talking about?

I'm talking about the reason for the season. What would drag billion-dollar companies into the dark side of the seedy underbelly of blackmarket sports? The next Lebron James shoe contract. Why don't you read up on how these Shoe companies are investing in 1000's of high school basketball players in hopes of finding and obligating the next 10 or 15 superstars from that class? The wealth that the next Lebron Jame, James Harden, or Steph Curry brings to these sneaker companies means billions of dollars in profits. It's a sound investment. Just highly illegal.

A couple of the alleged transactions — $100,000 for one Louisville recruit, $90,000 for one Kansas recruit, and lots of secondary players also get theirs. This stuff looks like the perfect crime. —

Why wouldn't the college coaches be more than willing to make these short-term investments? And you can often even use sneaker revenue to pay the bills. Will Wade, Miller, Self, and Petino have been implicated by tape or allegations in doing just that. Assistant coaches like Chuck Person acted alone, of course, for as long as Bruce Pearl can keep selling that to the NCAA. The same guy that couldn't sell a bar BQ.

And again, what motivates all this newfound college basketball sneaker wealth? The next Lebron James. You don't need but one of those and he has recently signed a new $500 million dollar contract. (Michael Jordan is still selling stuff)

I suggest we let the next Lebron James go on to the NBA as nature intended.

 

[n_huffhines]

I'm talking about the reason for the season. What would drag billion-dollar companies into the dark side of the seedy underbelly of blackmarket sports? The next Lebron James shoe contract. Why don't you read up on how these Shoe companies are investing in 1000's of high school basketball players in hopes of finding and obligating the next 10 or 15 superstars from that class? The wealth that the next Lebron Jame, James Harden, or Steph Curry brings to these sneaker companies means billions of dollars in profits. It's a sound investment. Just highly illegal.

A couple of the alleged transactions — $100,000 for one Louisville recruit, $90,000 for one Kansas recruit, and lots of secondary players also get theirs. This stuff looks like the perfect crime. —

Why wouldn't the college coaches be more than willing to make these short-term investments? And you can often even use sneaker revenue to pay the bills. Will Wade, Miller, Self, and Petino have been implicated by tape or allegations in doing just that. Assistant coaches like Chuck Person acted alone, of course, for as long as Bruce Pearl can keep selling that to the NCAA. The same guy that couldn't sell a bar BQ.

And again, what motivates all this newfound college basketball sneaker wealth? The next Lebron James. You don't need but one of those and he has recently signed a new $500 million dollar contract. (Michael Jordan is still selling stuff)

I suggest we let the next Lebron James go on to the NBA as nature intended.

IDK man, sounds like a weird theory. All you have to do is outbid the other shoe companies when they go pro. The players that went to an Adidas school are not obligated at all to choose Adidas in the pros. They'll do it if they like the shoes and the money. They won't if they have better offers. Adidas wants schools with their logo to be relevant. That's what it's about. Changing the one and done rule will not change that.

I don't think people realize how big the money is in the NCAA tournament. It has so many viewers it makes more $ than the entire NBA regular season. You get Adidas schools to the final 4 and that's bonus advertising they're willing to pay millions for.

 

[TUSKtimes]

IDK man, sounds like a weird theory. All you have to do is outbid the other shoe companies when they go pro. The players that went to an Adidas school are not obligated at all to choose Adidas in the pros. They'll do it if they like the shoes and the money. They won't if they have better offers. Adidas wants schools with their logo to be relevant. That's what it's about. Changing the one and done rule will not change that.

That sounds more like your struggling to understand big business and the cutthroat, high stakes poker games going on between Nike, Adidas and Under Armor for NBA superstars. The first rule of business, obligate the player. The time to do that isn't after the NBA draft. Unless you are partial to the expression, "a day late and a dollar short."

This obligation doesn't begin in high school it begins much earlier. The big 3 spend millions on youngsters to "help" develop a lifelong affinity to the brand. If that brand also follows them to college and indeed becomes the most important reason for choosing that particular school, that too becomes an extra layer of obligation to the brand. We're only human and these guys understand human nature very well. Business 101.

 

[n_huffhines]

That sounds more like your struggling to understand big business and the cutthroat, high stakes poker games going on between Nike, Adidas and Under Armor for NBA superstars. The first rule of business, obligate the player. The time to do that isn't after the NBA draft. Unless you are partial to the expression, "a day late and a dollar short."

This obligation doesn't begin in high school it begins much earlier. The big 3 spend millions on youngsters to "help" develop a lifelong affinity to the brand. If that brand also follows them to college and indeed becomes the most important reason for choosing that particular school, that too becomes an extra layer of obligation to the brand. We're only human and these guys understand human nature very well. Business 101.

How does a shoe company obligate them? They're not blackmailing them, because they'd be implicating themselves. If you're hypothesizing that the players just feel obligated out of loyalty, then I'd say you're reaching. There is almost no loyalty in this business. Players will ditch an organization and their fans when they have a better opportunity. Why wouldn't they ditch a shoe company when nobody will hate them for it?

Again, Adidas needs their schools to be relevant. Paying a few hundred thousand dollars for a final 4 appearance is money well spent. Eliminating one and done will not change this fact.

 

[TUSKtimes]

How does a shoe company obligate them? They're not blackmailing them, because they'd be implicating themselves. If you're hypothesizing that the players just feel obligated out of loyalty, then I'd say you're reaching. There is almost no loyalty in this business. Players will ditch an organization and their fans when they have a better opportunity. Why wouldn't they ditch a shoe company when nobody will hate them for it?

Again, Adidas needs their schools to be relevant. Paying a few hundred thousand dollars for a final 4 appearance is money well spent. Eliminating one and done will not change this fact.

I've laid it out for you. It's the kind of stuff that's in all your business and sports articles about the case and many more like it. Perhaps if you came back with a little more than your just not feeling it, I could see the reason to go on. Otherwise, all I can say is, you would make a lousy used car salesman.

 

[LouderVol]

Talking about shoes and players getting paid, whatever came of Zion Williamsons blowout Nikes?

 

[n_huffhines]

Talking about shoes and players getting paid, whatever came of Zion Williamsons blowout Nikes?

He parlayed it into the largest contract per year ever with Jordan brand.

 

[n_huffhines]

I've laid it out for you. It's the kind of stuff that's in all your business and sports articles about the case and many more like it. Perhaps if you came back with a little more than your just not feeling it, I could see the reason to go on. Otherwise, all I can say is, you would make a lousy used car salesman.

So loyalty then? You think they gave this guy $90k so he would wear Adidas in the NBDL?

 

[TUSKtimes]

So loyalty then? You think they gave this guy $90k so he would wear Adidas in the NBDL?

Loyalty, obligation, familiarity with the product. It's all part of branding. Psychological warfare, where you been?

Why do you think Adidas pours in millions of dollars annually to youth basketball, supplying different types of apparel for these kids to wear?

 

[n_huffhines]

Loyalty, obligation, familiarity with the product. It's all part of branding. Psychological warfare, where you been?

Why do you think Adidas pours in millions of dollars annually to youth basketball, supplying different types of apparel for these kids to wear?

Not because they think a kid might turn into the next Lebron James and stay loyal to them over choosing the best opportunity.

Regardless of whether or not you are right about this intention, take out the one and done and they'll still have a strong financial incentive to ensure Kansas is successful. It's not going to change anything. One and done didn't significantly worsen this problem. The money in college hoops grew. There are only a handful of straight to the NBA guys. How many guys are getting paid? 100?

 

[TUSKtimes]

Not because they think any specific kid might turn into the next Lebron James and stay loyal to them over choosing the best opportunity.

You mean, "not because YOU think any specific kid might turn into the next Lebron James and stay loyal to them."

"They" are on record as saying exactly that.

From the Washington Post:

"Chris Rivers, Adidas executive in charge of youth basketball, explained to the new faces in the room why a German apparel company spends millions of dollars on what the industry calls “grassroots.”
“The only [expletive] reason we’re here is for pro prospects,” Rivers said, according to three people in the room who requested anonymity. “We are here to sign professional athletes.”

Rivers is the former longtime No. 2 to Sonny Vaccaro, the famed former Nike, Reebok and Adidas executive considered the godfather of grass-roots basketball. Dressed casually in Adidas gear, clothing that undersold his stature in college and professional basketball, Rivers warned Adidas team managers that the competition at Nike and Under Armour would “be doing things dirty,” according to people who were in the room, and said if they needed assistance recruiting a prospect, to contact him or one of his top consultants, a group he referred to as his “elite crew.”

For Nike, Adidas and Under Armour, grass-roots basketball is an educated gamble — money spent in the hope that, among thousands of teenagers playing in their leagues, a few will become recognizable stars for their sponsored college teams and develop into NBA players worthy of endorsement deals. The overarching strategy is to cast a wide net and hopefully attract the next generational talent who will develop a lifelong affinity for the brand — and sell truckloads of shoes.
“Nike, Adidas and Under Armour say, ‘Hey, if we allocate a few million a year, and it eventually gets us the next LeBron, then it’s worth it,’ ” one former Under Armour coach said. “All it takes is one star.”

The three companies do not publicly disclose how much they spend on grass-roots leagues. In interviews, grass-roots coaches in all three leagues said sponsorships range from $50,000 to $150,000 annually, with most teams on the lower end of the range. Using a conservative estimate based on these figures and the number of teams in each league, Adidas spends at least $2.5 million annually on grassroots, Nike $2 million and Under Armour $1.5 million.

Nike’s stronghold in college basketball — 56 of the 87 schools in the top seven basketball conferences wear Nike, compared with 18 wearing Under Armour and 13 wearing Adidas — is what incited the shoe-company-spending arms race to spread into youth basketball.
Collectively, the three shoe-company leagues act as a farm system for the next generation of college and NBA stars. And since their inception, these leagues have drawn the attention of people whose livelihood depends on getting close to those very same prospects.

The offers from agents and their runners start to flow in shortly after the player ascends national rankings, the former grass-roots coach said, but they seldom go right to the player. Instead, the offers go to whoever is seen as close to the player: a parent, an uncle or the grass-roots coach.


The former grass-roots coach, who worked for a team sponsored by one of the three companies, agreed to discuss the offers he received when one of his players, then 16, became one of the country’s top 10 players in his class a few years ago.
The runner for one agent said he could get a prominent college coach to personally donate to the grass-roots team — funding a significant salary increase for the grass-roots coach — if the player promised to attend that school and then sign with the runner’s agency.


When it came time to discuss money, the former grass-roots coach said, smaller, boutique firms were more likely to offer cash up front, with the promise the player would sign when he went pro. One agent offered $25,000; another, $50,000.
“I don’t really see what’s wrong with an agent wanting to pay me $50,000 to help them land a player who might make them millions,” the former grass-roots coach said. “In any other industry, that’s just good business.”

Inside the basketball black market that put Adidas in the FBI's ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/spor...73ba76-c1ad-11e8-97a5-ab1e46bb3bc7_story.html

 

[LouderVol]

He parlayed it into the largest contract per year ever with Jordan brand.

So performance didnt hurt Nikes chances. If anyone had a right to not be brand loyal it would have been Zion.

 

[n_huffhines]

You mean, "not because YOU think any specific kid might turn into the next Lebron James and stay loyal to them."

"They" are on record as saying exactly that.

From the Washington Post:

"Chris Rivers, Adidas executive in charge of youth basketball, explained to the new faces in the room why a German apparel company spends millions of dollars on what the industry calls “grassroots.”
“The only [expletive] reason we’re here is for pro prospects,” Rivers said, according to three people in the room who requested anonymity. “We are here to sign professional athletes.”

Rivers is the former longtime No. 2 to Sonny Vaccaro, the famed former Nike, Reebok and Adidas executive considered the godfather of grass-roots basketball. Dressed casually in Adidas gear, clothing that undersold his stature in college and professional basketball, Rivers warned Adidas team managers that the competition at Nike and Under Armour would “be doing things dirty,” according to people who were in the room, and said if they needed assistance recruiting a prospect, to contact him or one of his top consultants, a group he referred to as his “elite crew.”

For Nike, Adidas and Under Armour, grass-roots basketball is an educated gamble — money spent in the hope that, among thousands of teenagers playing in their leagues, a few will become recognizable stars for their sponsored college teams and develop into NBA players worthy of endorsement deals. The overarching strategy is to cast a wide net and hopefully attract the next generational talent who will develop a lifelong affinity for the brand — and sell truckloads of shoes.
“Nike, Adidas and Under Armour say, ‘Hey, if we allocate a few million a year, and it eventually gets us the next LeBron, then it’s worth it,’ ” one former Under Armour coach said. “All it takes is one star.”

The three companies do not publicly disclose how much they spend on grass-roots leagues. In interviews, grass-roots coaches in all three leagues said sponsorships range from $50,000 to $150,000 annually, with most teams on the lower end of the range. Using a conservative estimate based on these figures and the number of teams in each league, Adidas spends at least $2.5 million annually on grassroots, Nike $2 million and Under Armour $1.5 million.

Nike’s stronghold in college basketball — 56 of the 87 schools in the top seven basketball conferences wear Nike, compared with 18 wearing Under Armour and 13 wearing Adidas — is what incited the shoe-company-spending arms race to spread into youth basketball.
Collectively, the three shoe-company leagues act as a farm system for the next generation of college and NBA stars. And since their inception, these leagues have drawn the attention of people whose livelihood depends on getting close to those very same prospects.

The offers from agents and their runners start to flow in shortly after the player ascends national rankings, the former grass-roots coach said, but they seldom go right to the player. Instead, the offers go to whoever is seen as close to the player: a parent, an uncle or the grass-roots coach.


The former grass-roots coach, who worked for a team sponsored by one of the three companies, agreed to discuss the offers he received when one of his players, then 16, became one of the country’s top 10 players in his class a few years ago.
The runner for one agent said he could get a prominent college coach to personally donate to the grass-roots team — funding a significant salary increase for the grass-roots coach — if the player promised to attend that school and then sign with the runner’s agency.


When it came time to discuss money, the former grass-roots coach said, smaller, boutique firms were more likely to offer cash up front, with the promise the player would sign when he went pro. One agent offered $25,000; another, $50,000.
“I don’t really see what’s wrong with an agent wanting to pay me $50,000 to help them land a player who might make them millions,” the former grass-roots coach said. “In any other industry, that’s just good business.”

Inside the basketball black market that put Adidas in the FBI's ...

I can't really argue this. It's saying they do both and confirms my thesis. They want to get them to their colleges because there is big money in that and also to hopefully become their pros. It doesn't really change my thesis (that one and done rule isn't the problem), but I concede the point that shoe companies are motivated by a hope for loyalty from pros.

 

[RDU VOL#14]

I hope all the blue bloods that are paying these 5 star kids 2ook plus to come pay for them get struck down and their coaches banned. I live in NC...have for 30 years now...married into a UNC family and actually pull for the heels when not playing UT... that said...let em burn
All of em


You guys think Barnes allows his players to get paid to play at UT?

Hell no. Not for a second . We still had a final four quality team last year...though it was our best in 30 or 40 years. Let's level the playing field. No more bagmen...

Then we will see who can coach and recruit. No more buying championships

Remove all the players at Duke UNC UK. Ku...etc...who beats UT last year? How many teams could have beat us last year?

How does it feel that we have SWEPT kentucky and won what? 3 of the last 4...and they have NBA players saying they know for a FACT that UK has paid players hundreds of thousands of dollars each??? Hahahahahah

I like you and usually agree with you, but none of those teams you listed made the final four. And every single team that made the final four could’ve beaten the Vols.

Also, be careful what you wish for when talking about who is doing it right and who isn’t . Some of those programs you talked have been popped in the past and one hasnt ever been looked at, but they all have something in common. They all have championships. We don’t even a Final Four visit and that has zero to do with other programs.

 

[Roustabout]

I like you and usually agree with you, but none of those teams you listed made the final four. And every single team that made the final four could’ve beaten the Vols.

Also, be careful what you wish for when talking about who is doing it right and who isn’t . Some of those programs you talked have been popped in the past and one hasnt ever been looked at, but they all have something in common. They all have championships. We don’t even a Final Four visit and that has zero to do with other programs.

Yup. Virginia Auburn and TTech are not blue bloods. Tech is particularly interesting as that was a duct tape and bailing wire roster. It wasn’t a program you would have identified 3 years ago. Pearl has recruited really well but just behind elite.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

I agree that non bluebloods listed right above were great last year. That's rare though...kentucky, carolina Duke and Kansas win more titles than all those other schools put together. Usually the final 4 has 2 blue bloods and 2 others. Some years only 1..

How good is duke without Zion and whoever else got paid? How good are those 4 programs without their star player or top 2 that got paid big bucks?

My point is that if the blue bloods cant pay those players big bucks to go there, those players end up on other teams like Tennessee. You guys really think teenagers are excited about moving to Kansas for 4 years? Really? The bustling metropolis of Kansas right,? With the mountains and ocean and everything...or just some corn fields in the middle of nowhere. That doesnt stand a chance of landing 3 kids every year that are in the top 200 in the country.

If those teams cant pay their way to the top, then teams like UT have a much smaller mountain to climb to get TO the top. It would be nice to not have to beat 4 or 5 future NBA players from UK every year. Even though they are usually all freshmen, it's still a tough job. If the NCAA isnt gonna stop them from paying athletes then they need to let everyone do it without fear. We have boosters with deep pockets too... and the whole state enjoyed that run last year. I would bet we have the means to cheat just like the bluebloods do. Let's level the playing field.

 

[n_huffhines]

I agree that non bluebloods listed right above were great last year. That's rare though...kentucky, carolina Duke and Kansas win more titles than all those other schools put together. Usually the final 4 has 2 blue bloods and 2 others. Some years only 1..

How good is duke without Zion and whoever else got paid? How good are those 4 programs without their star player or top 2 that got paid big bucks?

My point is that if the blue bloods cant pay those players big bucks to go there, those players end up on other teams like Tennessee. You guys really think teenagers are excited about moving to Kansas for 4 years? Really? The bustling metropolis of Kansas right,? With the mountains and ocean and everything...or just some corn fields in the middle of nowhere. That doesnt stand a chance of landing 3 kids every year that are in the top 200 in the country.

If those teams cant pay their way to the top, then teams like UT have a much smaller mountain to climb to get TO the top. It would be nice to not have to beat 4 or 5 future NBA players from UK every year. Even though they are usually all freshmen, it's still a tough job. If the NCAA isnt gonna stop them from paying athletes then they need to let everyone do it without fear. We have boosters with deep pockets too... and the whole state enjoyed that run last year. I would bet we have the means to cheat just like the bluebloods do. Let's level the playing field.

Duke doesn't have to pay the future lottery picks. They may pay them but Zion seems too smart to pick Duke because they gave him $200k or whatever. That's small potatoes if you are going to the NBA. He got more exposure there than he'd get anywhere else and parlayed that into the #1 pick and the largest shoe contract per year ever. He went from relatively unknown 5th ranked player in his HS class to most marketable player since Lebron in one college season. That's probably only possible at Duke

 

[RDU VOL#14]

I agree that non bluebloods listed right above were great last year. That's rare though...kentucky, carolina Duke and Kansas win more titles than all those other schools put together. Usually the final 4 has 2 blue bloods and 2 others. Some years only 1..

How good is duke without Zion and whoever else got paid? How good are those 4 programs without their star player or top 2 that got paid big bucks?

My point is that if the blue bloods cant pay those players big bucks to go there, those players end up on other teams like Tennessee. You guys really think teenagers are excited about moving to Kansas for 4 years? Really? The bustling metropolis of Kansas right,? With the mountains and ocean and everything...or just some corn fields in the middle of nowhere. That doesnt stand a chance of landing 3 kids every year that are in the top 200 in the country.

If those teams cant pay their way to the top, then teams like UT have a much smaller mountain to climb to get TO the top. It would be nice to not have to beat 4 or 5 future NBA players from UK every year. Even though they are usually all freshmen, it's still a tough job. If the NCAA isnt gonna stop them from paying athletes then they need to let everyone do it without fear. We have boosters with deep pockets too... and the whole state enjoyed that run last year. I would bet we have the means to cheat just like the bluebloods do. Let's level the playing field.

Well Duke had won 5 titles before Zion and 5 titles after him. I don’t know if Duke payed Zion or not. I know that Michael Avanetti is not someone I find credible in any way shape or form.

Also, at this point if it comes down to Duke or Tennessee for a 5 star recruit Duke will win that recruitment way more than it will lose. The opposite is also true for football. Even with your theory, Duke still has way more to sell when it comes to basketball than Tennessee. That’s just a fact and I don’t think it’s debatable. That’s why last year was so important . It’s time for Tennessee to kick the door down. UVA has, hopefully it’s our turn to do the same.

 

[sweatpants]

 

[LouderVol]

Duke doesn't have to pay the future lottery picks. They may pay them but Zion seems too smart to pick Duke because they gave him $200k or whatever. That's small potatoes if you are going to the NBA. He got more exposure there than he'd get anywhere else and parlayed that into the #1 pick and the largest shoe contract per year ever. He went from relatively unknown 5th ranked player in his HS class to most marketable player since Lebron in one college season. That's probably only possible at Duke

Duke doesnt have to pay when going up against UT or someone who isnt winning titles. but you bet your butt they are paying for the guys that kentucky, North Carolina, etc want.

here we are in a thread about a blue blood paying players. so it isn't a stretch to say another is.

 

[n_huffhines]

Duke doesnt have to pay when going up against UT or someone who isnt winning titles. but you bet your butt they are paying for the guys that kentucky, North Carolina, etc want.

here we are in a thread about a blue blood paying players. so it isn't a stretch to say another is.

Duke players probably get 3x the exposure Kentucky and UNC get. No one is on Duke's level. Everyone knows Cam Reddish and he was Duke's 3rd guy. I honestly can't name one Kansas player. If you named their best player, I'd probably say "oh, yeah."

 

[Boston Vol]

My respect for Bill Self just rose tenfold.

 

[n_huffhines]

I think one thing that definitely separates Duke from Kentucky is K strikes a better balance in his roster and that allows his freshmen to be stars. If you're a one and done guy and go to Kentucky, good luck getting 20 ppg. Duke usually has a nice mix of roles and role players. Like last year they had 3 stars in the starting 5, a pass first PG and a dirty work center. 2 of those guys got 20 ppg.

Do you want to go to Kentucky and be KAT, supposedly getting paid, say $150k, getting good exposure, and scoring 10 ppg? Or be MBIII at Duke for free, get incredible exposure, and get 21 ppg?

Devin Booker was the 13th pick in a bad draft in part because Kentucky didn't showcase his talent. Right now, the difference between 5th pick and 13th pick is over $2m per year. If he picked Kentucky over Duke because they gave him $150k, then he made the wrong choice.