|
Athanatos posted:Is this a big of a deal as it sounds, or one of those things that seems like it could change things but is really a footnote? One of the major things they're pushing for is paying football and basketball players so it depends what you think that will change.
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2014 23:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
superaielman posted:That's a lot of loving money the NCAA and schools are not going to be willing to pay out. I would expect to see a lot of programs shuttering rather than dealing with that kind of outlay of money. I'm all for pressuring the NCAA to change and (Like most everyone here) think the way they treat athletes is pretty lovely, but I don't think that solution is at all realistic. The TV money would hurt but I think merchandise sales might go up if they're actually name branded (especially if schools can reissue classic jerseys), the rest of it is either a new revenue stream or is a cost that is spread pretty far as to not be too terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Komet posted:The problems that plague American universities plague all universities. The main problem with American public universities (i.e., the big ones in terms of football) is that the states have reduced the percentage of funding that it covers per student by about 50%.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Toymachine posted:Honestly, NCAA players should just shut up and stop pretending like their $120,000 full ride scholarships don't mean poo poo. Most of these guys would be in backwoods Alabama pumping gas if it wasn't for colleges offering athletic scholarships. The biggest benefit of those scholarships could be replicated just as easily if an actual minor league for football existed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:The kid who got into school because of athletic skill and is using it to get a degree and better his or her life (remember, college sports aren't just football and basketball) in not what is being discussed in this argument. Nobody wants to pay 100k for that guy's autograph. And those kids are the ones who will get screwed over if college sports go full semi-pro. Which is why the union initially will only be for D1 football and basketball players.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 19:12
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:cough American car industry cough cough When we have foreign football teams taking all of the national championships I'll believe that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
ryan8723 posted:And they will get what they deserve, which is nothing. What I'm getting from most of you is that you are all perfectly okay with destroying 95% of the athletic programs in the country so long as the 5% get what is owed to them. Good job killing the dreams of a college education of loads of athletes from mid majors on down because no one can afford to pay athletes a salary because Title IX requires all athletes to be paid equally and insurance along with worker's comp eats up entire athletic budgets until they are forced to shut down. It's actually rather vague as to whether Title IX requires that. And even if it does requiring things like insurance and worker's comp should be standard, and the fact that they're not is shameful.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 12:19
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:That article about net-negative values for Bachelor's of Art degrees is just hilarious but it's a symptom of a larger problem: The U.S. has too many public universities. Realistically, about half of all universities should be shuttered since they cannot provide adequate education. But this will never happen because They can provide perfectly adequate education but they're not known for sexy degrees. My school is majorly (but not a majority) an engineering school and it's well known for those programs. If you get a history degree from here though you're kinda hosed just as much as if you were from a (more) no-name school. Quality of education does not matter. Ribsauce posted:The other problem with universities is how much money is dumped into administration and things which do not have to do with the alleged core objective of a university, which is to educate students (and at research universities, to help the population of the state). Just look at the gym on any campus, it is pretty much guaranteed to be by far the nicest gym in the city. Climbing walls, indoor pools., saunas, rows of equipment, etc. At Appalachian State every single student pays 71 dollars a semester just to service the debt on the gym they opened in 2006. That is more than the debt on our dining facilities, student union, our entire transportation system, and probably some other stuff, just for a drat gym! I can guarantee you administration costs will be the vast majority of any of those costs you named and yet you spent most of this paragraph complaining about a gym.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
Declan MacManus posted:Student housing is a legitimate problem as almost every college has more students who want to live on campus than they have dorms It is tangentially related as the main reason a lot of athletic programs are in the red is that they're deemed separate institutions by the university. If they received support from the university like Every Other Program on Campus instead of having to be entirely self-sufficient, there wouldn't be a problem. Hell, at my university they did the same thing with the dining program - for ~~Reasons~~ it had to be entirely self sufficient, and when it was deemed that it couldn't escape the red, it was sold off to a private company. Thoguh posted:That's very true, there really is an arms race for amenities on college campuses. In large part, I think, because few students seem to care how large their loans are until they come due. But that's a totally different conversation about the cost of attending college as opposed to college athletics. It's not true. Actually, if you want a good example of why not, look at the postal system - there are a few profitable parts of it (mostly cities, etc), and a lot of unprofitable parts. However, the profitable parts actually are so profitable that they (more or less) counteract the losses from the other areas. Now what would happen if for some reason you decided to group all of the non-profitable parts as a separate entity from the profitable ones? Suddenly we have a budget crisis and we need to cut routes/salaries/etc. computer parts fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Mar 30, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:
I mean if nothing else they're a great advertising tool (how many people do you think went to Alabama or LSU just on the basis of football or because their parents just went on the basis of football).
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2014 17:47
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Wow just read an article on this and it sounds really stupid and petty. All over names and faces on a video game. I thought it was rumored that Notre Dame or someone else big wanted to pull out of the whole thing as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2014 03:42
|
|
|
oldskool posted:It'll put them at a huge competitive disadvantage against The Ohio State University: Doesn't this just mean that they could unionize as private employees?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 22:10
|
|
|
effectual posted:Calm down bro, that's class warfare! Enjoy your free degree and like it!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2014 12:18
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Now the NCAA is throwing the 'student-athletes' a bone: unlimited meals and snacks. I guess they finally felt some embarrassment when the star player for UConn basketball talked after their championship about how he went to bed hungry most nights because he couldn't afford food? I'm betting this is a response to the Arian Foster story about his coach bringing him tacos.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 23:00 |
|
|
Crazy Ted posted:The Grand Tetons after named after a French slang word for titties. They're not the only ones.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 20:12
|
|