|
Looking at news about tv contracts, coaches salaries, those bowl CEO's salaries, it's impossible not to think CFB makes a ton of money, and what the school does with all that money is really unknown. Embezzling it through building projects seems pretty popular. They already count those scholarships as expenses, give it to the players, and no numbers changed on that end. Students get to pay for their own house party and entertainment, the stories will be amazing about these 18yr olds. They'll have to pay for health care, it's appalling that they don't now actually.. I don't know why people think the money isn't there to do this, that money is going somewhere, and it should be to the participants. Football is a prestige thing as all sports is anyways, and sometimes it becomes an expensive hobby? Where is all this money going? To unpopular sports that no one watches? Sorry go back to being a club, or pay for it yourself? Why is football/basketball responsible to subsidizing a school's expense? I very much doubt any school of even minior significance will stop running their football program, and not just change the rules to dump everything else. They are giving up billions from a ready made product. Femur fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jan 29, 2014 |
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:50 |
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:At all but about 30 or 40 institutions across the country, that money is all spent. I have no doubt the university knows where the money goes, but my point was that the money should go back into football, to pay the athletes, then this fantasy land where schools have no money disappears. Like maybe there wouldn't be an expense for a new Olympic pool and swimming team if there wasn't money left from football/basketball to build one? Then if the school wants that on their brochure, they pay for it themselves? There has been articles written about increased registration and such after a championship, sports and the attention it brings is a value to the school. I bet if football has to fight for it, they'll get a lot of donations ear marked to them that only they can spend; it could become a bunch of Green bay situations where the local area just comes to sponsor a team. So where is this "poor broke schools" narrative coming from? Because schools run bloated programs now because they can? It's like those Bowl CEOs who gave their friends and themselves huge salaries and fees in order to make the whole thing non-profit. How will you handle former players through, those that can't make it into the NFL, or flame out? How long do you let them play? King Hong Kong posted:As is alluded to above by Idiot Wind, while I certainly agree that football is labor in certain contexts - and should be treated as such in those contexts - it is not and should not be labor within the context of a university. To that end, I do not think that universities should endeavor to maximize profits from their athletic programs by means of exploiting their students, an aim which is contrary in spirit to universities' essential educational and research missions. Yeah, but the university invites players/coaches to donation events, and get more alumni interest when the team does well. They sell jerseys, merchandise, stadium seats, all with no compensation to the likeness of their players. The NFL is the dream, and college is how you get there, and universities are just exploiting the poo poo out of it. Regular students cost them money, so they gotta pay, football players make them money, but they also pay, in this "scholarship" crap, theie rights to use their name, and their work to prepare and play. You see from the above, the only ones that are DEFINTELY benefiting are the connected people able to put friends and families into administrative decision making positions, it's a giant old boys club basically, and this particular ones is exploiting our children, literally. Femur fucked around with this message at 22:57 on Jan 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
Fenrir posted:Wait wait, is someone really trying to argue against the fact that college athletes are exploited? Seriously? Ok, my loving brain hurts. These guys work far beyond regular college requirements and put their bodies on the line for 10-15 weeks a year and can't even sell their signatures without being suspended. I mean, loving really? Well you see, universities are enlightened places of learning. -future UT president Rick Perry
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2014 23:06
|
|
|
King Hong Kong posted:I wonder why I said "not technically." So before colleges, you had apprenticeships, which was also a system wherein the student paid money to the master to impart their knowledge. So at what time did this free education reality of yours exist?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2014 00:16
|
|
|
I read that the reason for bulking up was more because of nutrition and professional trainers than anything. If there was a farm league, players would be scouted at much younger ages, and trained correctly. This assumes that teams employ the best trainers and not friends of a friend through.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Maxwells Demon posted:That assumes that growing bodies can handle or should be made to handle a large amount of training and bulking up while still in adolescence. You would also get an even larger disparity of talent at the high-school age if certain athletes had professional trainers and nutritionists while others did not. Or are you suggesting that football players be yanked out of high school and have them play in a farm league before HS graduation? Yeah, get them young. Supposedly, players and their families are bribed to move within desired district lines now, or just offer scholarships to private schools now; so it's more formalizing the whole thing. I am not an expert on nutrition or training, but it seems like these star athletes get hanger-ons who claim to be such, but there are also stories of teams employing lovely trainers and doctors also. I don't know what option would be best for the kids, hopefully a more structured developmental path helps, but corruption and waste is always possible.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:So you think the athletes who do all the work deserve nothing, but those of use who sit on our couches and consume this poo poo deserve to have this product? <insert beer ad>
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 06:10
|
|
|
What is even the point of CFB? I mean if it's about tradition and pride, so what if you go broke winning? Isn't that the point? CFB right now, it's like you want to watch ringers playing on your behalf, but not paying them like the ringers they are. Why? And if it's a business enterprise, there's free labor because?? .. They're freaks and have no where else go to? Chichevache posted:I don't play division 1 football, but are they not providing medical care for them already? Like, when Lattimore loving demolished his knee did Carolina just toss him out like an old eskimo on an iceflow? Is there a general rule to this? I want to say that from the few documentaries I've watched and articles posted here, it seems like you're out of luck once you leave the school. So if your knee starts hurting after you graduate or whatever, you just become the taxpayer's problem. I think there was a court case won by the school to state this. If schools were liable, then players would be employees and are hosed on this whole student athlete thing. As far as the school is concerned, players are just horsing around in between classes, nothing to do with them. This crap flies in court, that's how awesome inertia is. Femur fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Mar 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 07:57
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:the quickest response would be to limit the time spent on athletics to get under the cap. Declan MacManus already went over this, but the teams already get around this by "non-mandatory" duties. If you don't show, someone else will, then you are out your education and a year of eligibility. The morality of squeezing kids passed the agreed upon limits is up to you, but a vast majority believes this is free enterprise and how the "real" world works.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 21:52
|
|
|
Isn't NCAAF a skin of Madden? How much extra expense is that to create?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:50 |
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The odd thing about this whole situation is that the anger about their "exploitation" doesn't come from the players themselves, for the most part. It is largely outsiders doing most of the agitation. How do you know this to be true? Maybe just until recently, participants were just too afraid to come forward? They will be branded soft, disloyal by the people like you. And who would they complain to? The NCAA doesn't have student representation. Unsurprisingly Players lack resources to hire lawyers. I remember that one UNC student was banned from a simple e-mail, no investigation. This is the power they can wield against dissatisfaction. But then you got that interview with Foster and his teammates about going hungry. What do you think they were talking about while starving? Their love of the game. I find it disingenuous that you can support oppression just because you claim to not hear the cries. You just choose not to listen. And PR costs money, which.. I don't it is a coincidence that free PR tools like twitter have finally given them courage to expose their predicament.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2014 22:25
|
|