Paying players

[tnutater]

This has always been true, right?

The exception to the rule has always been the Matt Campbells of the world. Were there mid-tier program coaches in 1991 who were turning down the equivalent of $65M? I don't remember.

IMHO. we should have hired Campbell at whatever the cost.

 

[miket4god]

IMHO. we should have hired Campbell at whatever the cost.

Not sure there is a realistic number that would have accomplished this.

 

[wmcovol]

This has always been true, right?

The exception to the rule has always been the Matt Campbells of the world. Were there mid-tier program coaches in 1991 who were turning down the equivalent of $65M? I don't remember.

Today, the recruiting rules are pretty even. If a kid can make $150,000 in NIL money at Texas and only $30,000 at Iowa State, the issue of sitting the bench a couple years might not be as bad.

 

[n_huffhines]

Today, the recruiting rules are pretty even. If a kid can make $150,000 in NIL money at Texas and only $30,000 at Iowa State, the issue of sitting the bench a couple years might not be as bad.

How do you figure that the recruiting rules are even? When you can't pay players, other factors determine the players' choice. You're introducing a new factor. You're not making the rules uneven.

And judging by the rules rather than the results is what got us here. They designed a system to instill fairness and parity and most college sports are mostly dominated by just a few schools. The pro sports leagues pay players and do a much better job of creating parity. Even the NBA, which is the league that suffers the most from players jumping ship for big markets and superteams.

 

[allvolrecruiting]

Georgia just landed 2 5 stars that were not takes at other SEC schools because of grades (Gilbert and Kendrick) and off the field red flags (Kendrick). Not a bottom level team like Vandy either; Florida, LSU, Clemson to name a few.

 

[wmcovol]

Georgia just landed 2 5 stars that were not takes at other SEC schools because of grades (Gilbert and Kendrick) and off the field red flags (Kendrick). Not a bottom level team like Vandy either; Florida, LSU, Clemson to name a few.

Georgia is going rouge, bama-style.....

 

[LouderVol]

The athletes might need to be paid via federal and state law, but each situation should be going thru the administrative process for determinations.

The problem is, there really shouldn't be a "system" to start with, if individual schools want a certain policy than generally that wouldn't have been a huge issue. The problem is the "system" in which the schools have acted, and I would argue very provable in a criminal manner.


- I see nothing generally wrong with an individual school saying a scholarship player can't have outside income or specific income limitations
- There is something terribly wrong with schools forming associations form to stop commerce and blacklist, which is what is going on

Either way, all of this is coming to a very rapid conclusion.

I think you have the situations flipped. At least historically. The school associations came together to make an even playing field, necessary for a competitive sport. That went from on the field, to off the field with scholarship limits, then grades. And so on and so forth.

If you make it a free for all Bear Bryant would even be ashamed with what schools will do with their "employees". No way to maintain a shed of balance in the sport.

Which will tear down the system. Like the NCAA Football games. It will either transform into something unrecognizable or die off completely.

 

[LouderVol]

How do you figure that the recruiting rules are even? When you can't pay players, other factors determine the players' choice. You're introducing a new factor. You're not making the rules uneven.

And judging by the rules rather than the results is what got us here. They designed a system to instill fairness and parity and most college sports are mostly dominated by just a few schools. The pro sports leagues pay players and do a much better job of creating parity. Even the NBA, which is the league that suffers the most from players jumping ship for big markets and superteams.

Is it really parity if the super stars just get bought/sold/moved around?

You arent creating parity within the season. You are just artificially allowing the appearance of parity by shifting around the dynamic players. Who generally continue to dominate, just at a different location. While the old team may suffer. With no set variables, beyond team names, what are you really basing professional parity on?

 

[n_huffhines]

Is it really parity if the super stars just get bought/sold/moved around?

You arent creating parity within the season. You are just artificially allowing the appearance of parity by shifting around the dynamic players. Who generally continue to dominate, just at a different location. While the old team may suffer. With no set variables, beyond team names, what are you really basing professional parity on?

That's not how I view things at all. This is really only true of Lebron and kind of true of KD and Kawhi, but nobody would say those 2 have dominated the league.

The Heat went to the finals with Jimmy Butler leading the way. That run came out of nowhere. Kawhi hadn't proven anything as a #1 option when he won the title with Toronto in 2019. Golden St was a homegrown dynasty that KD latched onto after failing to dominate with just other 1 superstar at his side.

The finals this year might be the Clippers, Jazz, or Suns vs. the 76ers, Nets, or Bucks. We have no idea what's going to happen. Those 6 teams have just 5 rings between their 15 stars. That's parity.

 

[LouderVol]

That's not how I view things at all. This is really only true of Lebron and kind of true of KD and Kawhi, but nobody would say those 2 have dominated the league.

The Heat went to the finals with Jimmy Butler leading the way. That run came out of nowhere. Kawhi hadn't proven anything as a #1 option when he won the title with Toronto in 2019. Golden St was a homegrown dynasty that KD latched onto after failing to dominate with just other 1 superstar at his side.

The finals this year might be the Clippers, Jazz, or Suns vs. the 76ers, Nets, or Bucks. We have no idea what's going to happen. Those 6 teams have just 5 rings between their 15 stars. That's parity.

Idk. Judging parity based on success just seems lazy. And enforcement based on that seems weighted and misguided. Parity is equality of opprotunity, not equality of results.