Can We Retain Henry T and QC

[CAVPUT]

Henry T is long gone. Fans need to move on from him.

 

[norrislakevol]

No. NO. A BILLION times NO!!!!!!

Whatever business you work for may make millions or billions. We have privates humping a ruck in God forsaken places around the world to secure that for you. At home, their wives are working two jobs and drawing food stamps to make ends meet. They're sacrificing in hopes of a better future for themselves and their families... but also for you and others.


These athletes are NOT being victimized in any way, shape, or form. They are receiving a unique, incredible PRIVILEGE that they should be grateful for every day.

And bottom line... if they don't like that deal... they do not have to take it. They don't have to keep taking it even now. How many 10's of thousands of kids with less talent wouldn't love to take their places?

You know what you sign up for, it's that simple. Whether you sign up for the military or sign to play college ball you have obligations once that ink dries. I have no problem with players getting a little something, but it can't be outrageous.

 

[sjt18]

So the unique, incredible privilege is you make 100's of millions off my body and in return you give me free school & a roomate smfh. They are not in the regular workforce so the same rules dont apply.

And yet when you need them to... you claim they do. They deserve what their agreement says they deserve and nothing more. If they've got a better deal then they should take it.

Regular students can go to school for free if they have the grades.

So... now you are comparing a kid who excels in academics getting financial help with one who does something wholly unrelated to academic performance?

How is their physical health compromised ??Thats not a privilege that's called hard work.

And you are still trying to dance around the truth. Kids in the military come home without limbs... and don't make $50K a year. Yet you want to complain about these players being mistreated? AND YOU STILL WON'T DEAL THE THE MAIN THING. IT IS A VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT THAT THEY SIGN. NONE OF THEM HAVE TO SIGN IT.

There are tons of athletes who also recieve academic scholarships.

IIRC, a player on scholarship who plays football must be counted against the programs scholarship allowance.

They still play football and they still generate millions for the schools. NCAA football aint a privilege its a competition plain and simple.

You have no idea how to follow a point or lay out a logical argument do you? IT DOES NOT MATTER how much money is "generated". The agreement with the player is the agreement. They don't have to sign it. They don't have to play or risk their health.

Yes. It is a PRIVILEGE that few get. Hundreds of thousands of kids play HS football. About 11,000 get to play D-1 football... and many or probably most of those who aren't good enough... would do anything to have that PRIVILEGE.

And you seriously don't think the military is "competition"? Do you know so little about the business world that you don't understand economic competition?

My companies revenues DWARF those of UT's AD. NO ONE is paid based on how much the company makes. They're paid based on the offer they accepted which roughly corresponds to their market value.

If players think their market value is higher somewhere else then they should take that deal instead. NO ONE forces them to play football. NO ONE.

Thats why they have multi million dollar tv deals, media deals, & big brand sponsors. 100% of NFL players come from somebody's school. The NCAA is a farm system. The players deserve to be paid.

The benefits these guys get to play college football DIRECTLY are around $50K per year. THEY ARE BEING PAID. In fact, they're making more than most skilled industrial laborers after 20 years. They are NOT being cheated... not even close.

What 200 players per year out of college football at all levels... roughly 1%. Most don't get drafted. Many who do wash out within the first couple of years. Some don't even make a roster. THOSE PLAYERS got a delayed benefit in the form of a salary to play football. The other 99% that weren't good enough have an opportunity for a free education that most do not get. Not only that... they have a leg up with employers who are boosters.

 

[Voltildeath1]

With our D staff? Apparently Michigan was one of HT’s top 4 schools to transfer to and we just stole their LB coach who is a great recruiter apparently. I wonder if that has a lot to do with why we chose him. Or at least factors in. Thoughts?

If Saban can make the numbers work, he is all Bama.

 

[Other_Guy]

Henry T is long gone. Fans need to move on from him.

I certainly have. I don't blame him for leaving but I wish he would have hung around to see who was coach first. Makes me like him less now. O well. Hope he does well except when Salter throws over his head next year because he still can't cover the middle ,

 

[All_Vol87]

View attachment 353457

I pissed a little lol

 

[PineyBluff Vol]

If Saban can make the numbers work, he is all Bama.

I would think HT should be working out with some team at this time.

 

[1982Alum]

When does this senseless discussion end? Who cares where they go? No fans worth their orange T-shirts here wants them so who cares at this point.?

 

[901 Orange]

And yet when you need them to... you claim they do. They deserve what their agreement says they deserve and nothing more. If they've got a better deal then they should take it.
So... now you are comparing a kid who excels in academics getting financial help with one who does something wholly unrelated to academic performance?

And you are still trying to dance around the truth. Kids in the military come home without limbs... and don't make $50K a year. Yet you want to complain about these players being mistreated? AND YOU STILL WON'T DEAL THE THE MAIN THING. IT IS A VOLUNTARY AGREEMENT THAT THEY SIGN. NONE OF THEM HAVE TO SIGN IT.

IIRC, a player on scholarship who plays football must be counted against the programs scholarship allowance.

You have no idea how to follow a point or lay out a logical argument do you? IT DOES NOT MATTER how much money is "generated". The agreement with the player is the agreement. They don't have to sign it. They don't have to play or risk their health.

Yes. It is a PRIVILEGE that few get. Hundreds of thousands of kids play HS football. About 11,000 get to play D-1 football... and many or probably most of those who aren't good enough... would do anything to have that PRIVILEGE.

And you seriously don't think the military is "competition"? Do you know so little about the business world that you don't understand economic competition?

My companies revenues DWARF those of UT's AD. NO ONE is paid based on how much the company makes. They're paid based on the offer they accepted which roughly corresponds to their market value.

If players think their market value is higher somewhere else then they should take that deal instead. NO ONE forces them to play football. NO ONE.


The benefits these guys get to play college football DIRECTLY are around $50K per year. THEY ARE BEING PAID. In fact, they're making more than most skilled industrial laborers after 20 years. They are NOT being cheated... not even close.

What 200 players per year out of college football at all levels... roughly 1%. Most don't get drafted. Many who do wash out within the first couple of years. Some don't even make a roster. THOSE PLAYERS got a delayed benefit in the form of a salary to play football. The other 99% that weren't good enough have an opportunity for a free education that most do not get. Not only that... they have a leg up with employers who are boosters.

U bring up military and I hate to even go there because its 2 totally different situations. Are u comparing military benefits to free education?? I've got a lot of family in the military and im pretty sure that free education comes with the other benefits. If u get hurt there are forms of help. What do ncaaf players get?? Your only stance is free education, but that's not a priviledge. Anyone can literally earn an academic scholly if they put in the work. That means they could still go to college if college football wasnt an option. I played with quite a few guys in high school that still went to college and didnt play football. No one is forcing them to play football really??? How else are they going to get to the NFL?? U continue to try to compare players to the workforce and it aint the same thing period, so it doesnt matter what happens in the regular workforce. How can u have college football if you dont have player's? This is my whole point. They would still have higer education available if there were no football. They are only able to make millions because of players and you think they are only entitled to free education.

 

[sjt18]

U bring up military and I hate to even go there because its 2 totally different situations.

No. It isn't when you are claiming that NCAA athletes should get paid more than the current $50K+ because they might get injured. Kids the same age are risking their lives and permanent disability for far less.

Are u comparing military benefits to free education?? I've got a lot of family in the military and im pretty sure that free education comes with the other benefits.

Ask them. It is hardly "free" and it has a limited benefit FAR less than what football players currently get. Missouri has a program where the state will pay a Guardsman's tuition as part of their contract. Between their drill pay, partial GI bill, and bonus they can make about $1000 during school months for ALL of their other expenses... the ones paid for by football scholarships.

If u get hurt there are forms of help. What do ncaaf players get??

LOL... they get FREE treatment by the best surgeons and sports doctors in the WORLD. Unless something has changed, there is some form of long term help for injuries they incur playing college ball.

Your only stance is free education, but that's not a priviledge. Anyone can literally earn an academic scholly if they put in the work.

That's not true either... and certainly not a scholarship covering as much as a football scholarship. Few kids get full academic scholarships. A lot of those are tied to some kind of service or career commitment after graduation.... usually at a lower salary than they might have otherwise earned in open competition.

But since you made the point... you are saying that these football players could work hard enough to get an academic scholarship so they don't have to risk their bodies, right?

That means they could still go to college if college football wasnt an option. I played with quite a few guys in high school that still went to college and didnt play football.

And? This doesn't help you at all.

No one is forcing them to play football really??? How else are they going to get to the NFL??

And you make my point FOR ME. If their goal of playing college football is to make the NFL then they are assuming the RISKS and RESPONSIBILITIES that come with getting a chance to audition for the NFL. Along with it... ALL of their expenses are covered and they get a college education. Again, a GREAT deal for them.

U continue to try to compare players to the workforce and it aint the same thing period, so it doesnt matter what happens in the regular workforce.

No. YOU and those who are arguing LIKE YOU are doing that when you say the players should get paid because they produce revenue for the AD. But when someone demonstrates the flaws in your reasoning... you want to cry foul. You want to say they're parallel when it helps your argument but aren't related when it falsifies your argument.

This really isn't surprising considering the moral relativism you all engage in to even get to this point.

How can u have college football if you dont have player's? This is my whole point.

I GUARANTEE that there will be no shortage of good players ready to step up and take those scholarships if the current players don't want them.

They would still have higer education available if there were no football. They are only able to make millions because of players and you think they are only entitled to free education.

They're getting an education AND benefits worth over $50,000 per year. Less than 1% of those players are good enough to make a living playing football. That fully paid education you dismiss so smugly... something that most kids DO NOT GET... is THE VALUE most of these players get.

 

[vegasvolfan]

U bring up military and I hate to even go there because its 2 totally different situations. Are u comparing military benefits to free education?? I've got a lot of family in the military and im pretty sure that free education comes with the other benefits. If u get hurt there are forms of help. What do ncaaf players get?? Your only stance is free education, but that's not a priviledge. Anyone can literally earn an academic scholly if they put in the work. That means they could still go to college if college football wasnt an option. I played with quite a few guys in high school that still went to college and didnt play football. No one is forcing them to play football really??? How else are they going to get to the NFL?? U continue to try to compare players to the workforce and it aint the same thing period, so it doesnt matter what happens in the regular workforce. How can u have college football if you dont have player's? This is my whole point. They would still have higer education available if there were no football. They are only able to make millions because of players and you think they are only entitled to free education.

Dude its simple. You get a scholly and a shot at being a professional whatever in return for working hard in the books. You get a scholly for working hard in sports and a shot at millions in the NFL and in some other profession if it doesn’t work out. Both are rewards for working hard and worth a ton of money. Atheletes actually have two options. As long as athletes can work on top of that which they can now, that is plenty. I do think they should be able to monetize their name however.

 

[BlinghamptonVol]

Dude its simple. You get a scholly and a shot at being a professional whatever in return for working hard in the books. You get a scholly for working hard in sports and a shot at millions in the NFL and in some other profession if it doesn’t work out. Both are rewards for working hard and worth a ton of money. Atheletes actually have two options. As long as athletes can work on top of that which they can now, that is plenty. I do think they should be able to monetize their name however.

The difference is the school monetizes the athletes and makes millions off of their names and ability. ESPN monetizes the athletes and makes millions. Dumba$$es like Pruitt make millions of dollars failing at their job of training the athletes, but the idea that an athlete could sign their own name and get money, it’s the end of civilization for some posters on here.

Schools, espn and professors don’t monetize their academic students for millions.

 

[de1conley]

Please correct me if I’m wrong. When Tee was playing didn’t someone ( I think a booster ) had his car fixed for him? Again I may be wrong if I am I’m sorry

They gave him money and had a very expensive sound system put in it. It was very nice. Several basketball players had it likewise. Hell even Albert had a new shiny Excursion. I can go on and on lmao.

 

[sjt18]

I do think they should be able to monetize their name however.

I would support the opposite. Schools should not be able to monetize the images of particular players.

What you are talking about assures even MORE inequity in recruiting and a "fixing" of the current class structure in football. Winning teams already have a huge recruiting advantage. Give them the ability to pay guys who are featured in a national commercial that displays a team photo... and what does a team trying to fight out of a hole like UT do to compete for the best athletes?

 

[vegasvolfan]

I would support the opposite. Schools should not be able to monetize the images of particular players.

What you are talking about assures even MORE inequity in recruiting and a "fixing" of the current class structure in football. Winning teams already have a huge recruiting advantage. Give them the ability to pay guys who are featured in a national commercial that displays a team photo... and what does a team trying to fight out of a hole like UT do to compete for the best athletes?

I am saying a guy should be able to make money off of his l signature etc.

 

[sjt18]

I am saying a guy should be able to make money off of his l signature etc.

I understand what you are saying. I don't think you are accounting for the problems that would create. A person does not have unlimited "rights" to their image et al when that value is created by and only possible due to association with another entity. They definitely do not have such rights if their signed agreement with someone else says so.

But you didn't answer my main point. Such a move would in effect reward the "rich" and punish the "poor"... and create a permanent caste system in college football. Do you want Bama's position to be strengthened to the point that they cannot be challenged? If guys playing for Bama would make a lot more money by selling their image as would be the case now then the best players will be even more inclined to play for Bama or a handful of other programs.

If delayed gratification is truly so offensive and unfair... then we need a developmental league for the NFL so college football can become more "amateur" again. It has become mercenary and the arguments you all are making would institutionalize that.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

I would support the opposite. Schools should not be able to monetize the images of particular players.

What you are talking about assures even MORE inequity in recruiting and a "fixing" of the current class structure in football. Winning teams already have a huge recruiting advantage. Give them the ability to pay guys who are featured in a national commercial that displays a team photo... and what does a team trying to fight out of a hole like UT do to compete for the best athletes?

I agree completely. The things being discussed just insure that the "haves" have more and the "have nots" stay that way.

BTW, my son may be taking care of your son one of these days. He is an Aerospace Propulsion Technician (which is a fancy name for a jet mechanic) in the USAF.

 

[sjt18]

I agree completely. The things being discussed just insure that the "haves" have more and the "have nots" stay that way.

BTW, my son may be taking care of your son one of these days. He is an Aerospace Propulsion Technician (which is a fancy name for a jet mechanic) in the USAF.

LOL. They may know each other. I think that's the technical title my son has. He works on the B-2 at Whiteman.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

LOL. They may know each other. I think that's the technical title my son has. He works on the B-2 at Whiteman.

My son is in Okinawa with the F-15 group. Not exactly neighbors.

 

[vegasvolfan]

I understand what you are saying. I don't think you are accounting for the problems that would create. A person does not have unlimited "rights" to their image et al when that value is created by and only possible due to association with another entity. They definitely do not have such rights if their signed agreement with someone else says so.

But you didn't answer my main point. Such a move would in effect reward the "rich" and punish the "poor"... and create a permanent caste system in college football. Do you want Bama's position to be strengthened to the point that they cannot be challenged? If guys playing for Bama would make a lot more money by selling their image as would be the case now then the best players will be even more inclined to play for Bama or a handful of other programs.

If delayed gratification is truly so offensive and unfair... then we need a developmental league for the NFL so college football can become more "amateur" again. It has become mercenary and the arguments you all are making would institutionalize that.

Hard to say. I get what you are saying though, but you can legally create just about any other type of legal business as a student. Why should athletes not be able to just because some schools can’t keep up? I guess the difference is that the exposure is created by the U and would not be there otherwise.

 

[vegasvolfan]

I understand what you are saying. I don't think you are accounting for the problems that would create. A person does not have unlimited "rights" to their image et al when that value is created by and only possible due to association with another entity. They definitely do not have such rights if their signed agreement with someone else says so.

But you didn't answer my main point. Such a move would in effect reward the "rich" and punish the "poor"... and create a permanent caste system in college football. Do you want Bama's position to be strengthened to the point that they cannot be challenged? If guys playing for Bama would make a lot more money by selling their image as would be the case now then the best players will be even more inclined to play for Bama or a handful of other programs.

If delayed gratification is truly so offensive and unfair... then we need a developmental league for the NFL so college football can become more "amateur" again. It has become mercenary and the arguments you all are making would institutionalize that.

I’m curious if anyone has ever proposed creating a minor league kids could play in and do whatever they want and possible be drafted. Football is the only sport I know of where you have to go through college.

 

[TNnative]

My sons both joined the Air Guard to pay for college. One lost a summer and a semester. The other was delayed a full year from starting college. I'm not complaining since they gained great experience and learned that you make sacrifices to get where you want to go. That's much of the issue I have with these athletes. They're getting an education and benefits that amount to something close to $50K per year. They'll have relationships with employers and others that can help start their post-college, non-football careers that other kids cannot even dream of.

Even my sons who both have security clearances and can say they worked on the B-2 bomber won't get those kinds of "ins" with employers. If boosters want to "compensate" players... maybe they should promise them good paying jobs when they graduate? Sign-on bonuses? Above market salaries? These players aren't going to "suffer" poverty during their college careers. They can wait to be rewarded like everyone else.

But this is becoming an entitlement nation. I have heard a few of my "progressive" thinking friends say it so often, I have turned a deaf ear to them. However, too many of these younger folks are buying into that BS. As to your sons? No they may not get those kind of "ins". But they sure as Hell earned them. Much more than some football players, that's for sure.

 

[sjt18]

But this is becoming an entitlement nation. I have heard a few of my "progressive" thinking friends say it so often, I have turned a deaf ear to them. However, too many of these younger folks are buying into that BS. As to your sons? No they may not get those kind of "ins". But they sure as Hell earned them. Much more than some football players, that's for sure.

I wouldn't complain and neither would they. My older son works for a company with one of the most iconic brands in the world in corporate distribution... in St Louis if that gives you a hint. My younger son has a good chance to fly the A-10 or KC-135... and maybe the B-2.

I just don't get the notion that these football players are being cheated.

FWIW, I jumped into this not because of these crazy ideas about compensating them now.... but to answer those who were justifying cheating. Whatever the rules are they should apply to everyone and should be enforced. Instead of being punished, schools that self-report and offer improvement plans should be encouraged. The hammer should come down hard on those that cover up cheating... but we have just the opposite right now.

 

[SaintLouisVol]

I’m curious if anyone has ever proposed creating a minor league kids could play in and do whatever they want and possible be drafted. Football is the only sport I know of where you have to go through college.

I don't think that would accomplish what many advocates want to accomplish. The reason most of these players' likenesses have value is because of the multi-millions of dollars spent by the CFB machine to market the sport and its talent. Plus, CFB has a massive fanbase. I can't imagine a "farm system" for the NFL that could begin to approach that kind of scale. How many minor league baseball or hockey games do you want to watch on TV? Do you see a farm system that would have the financial resources to even begin to approach the quality of coaching, medical attention, training knowledge and facilities, etc. that is offered by most P5 schools?

Further, I think it would be less valued by HS talent than some people think. Yes, there are players who choose a college for the sole purpose of an extended audition for the NFL, but I believe the majority of them understand that a scholarship is an opportunity to play a game they love for a few more years and position themselves for a much greater chance of success in life than they might have otherwise. Playing in college and earning a degree is the best choice for 99% of those with the ability to play above the HS level, because they aren't going to play in the NFL. Think of Josh Dobbs. That dude could hang up his cleats tomorrow and go work for NASA.

 

[vegasvolfan]

I don't think that would accomplish what many advocates want to accomplish. The reason most of these players' likenesses have value is because of the multi-millions of dollars spent by the CFB machine to market the sport and its talent. Plus, CFB has a massive fanbase. I can't imagine a "farm system" for the NFL that could begin to approach that kind of scale. How many minor league baseball or hockey games do you want to watch on TV? Do you see a farm system that would have the financial resources to even begin to approach the quality of coaching, medical attention, training knowledge and facilities, etc. that is offered by most P5 schools?

Further, I think it would be less valued by HS talent than some people think. Yes, there are players who choose a college for the sole purpose of an extended audition for the NFL, but I believe the majority of them understand that a scholarship is an opportunity to play a game they love for a few more years and position themselves for a much greater chance of success in life than they might have otherwise. Playing in college and earning a degree is the best choice for 99% of those with the ability to play above the HS level, because they aren't going to play in the NFL. Think of Josh Dobbs. That dude could hang up his cleats tomorrow and go work for NASA.

I just think this is a situation where people want to have their cake and eat it too. I think if they don’t value the scholarship to the point where they feel it is enough they could be provided another option. I mean people watch the 7on7, so why wouldn’t they watch this league? But there is no situation where all of it is right IMO... personally my vote is that it stays as it is.