charliehustle14;610423 wrote:Secondly, what tattoo artist, in their right mind, is going to do a tat for free just because some 20 year old signed something for him? I just don't buy it. Taking that time out of the day to do a free tattoo is not good business and can really impact the financial livelihood of a tattoo artist.
dwccrew;610660 wrote:I think an easy solution would be to pay $1 for each tatoo. The NCAA can't dictate what reasonable pricing for tatoo services are; as long as money has changed hands, it should be out of the NCAA jurisdiction. Players go back and pay $1 for each tatoo, finalizing the transaction.
charliehustle14;611451 wrote:So these guys are on a full ride so all their text books are paid for.
So the books are essentially a gift....if they sell those on eBay following a quarter (like I do and every other college kid does), is that a violation?
darbypitcher22;611676 wrote:I mean, if you don't want it, donate it to the football offices or something to create a new display out in the lobby of all the different rings they've had made over the last couple of years.... but don't dsell it
Scarlet_Buckeye;611735 wrote:Take it from someone who knows... they are NOT allowed to sell the books on eBay.
That really said it all.I will be attending The University of Ohio State.
Scarlet_Buckeye;611735 wrote:Take it from someone who knows... they are NOT allowed to sell the books on eBay.
Scarlet_Buckeye;611751 wrote:DUMB.
Of course they want it... they just wanted CASH more than they wanted a piece of memorabilia.
darbypitcher22;611763 wrote:Cash that they shouldn't need while on scholarship playing football at a major Division I unversity between the scholly check and the stipend
darbypitcher22;611843 wrote:I read what you said.
that being said, I don't think they should have done it
cats gone wild;611285 wrote:Oh, yeah, vball.......if you supposedly have proof I pm'd you.........prove it. Oh, thats what I though......you cant. Quit stalking me phaggot.
Scarlet_Buckeye;611679 wrote:This is a good point.
Tobias Fünke;613214 wrote:No, it's not. The NCAA can and would dictate that a $1 tattoo is preferential treatment. It's the opposite end of the spectrum for overpaying an athlete to do a job.
I don't think he has the cajones, but that's okay--the poster in question is showing his true (rainbow) colors, so it's all good.Murdski99;612755 wrote:...hey trueblue, shouldn't this guy be receiving a ohiochatter infraction point for name calling?
Yes, tatoo services are unique when comparing them to the purchase of a car or any other purchase that has a specific pricing scale. Tatoos are determined by the individual artist, not a collective group that determine a price.Manhattan Buckeye;613988 wrote:"I think an easy solution would be to pay $1 for each tatoo. The NCAA can't dictate what reasonable pricing for tatoo services are; as long as money has changed hands, it should be out of the NCAA jurisdiction. Players go back and pay $1 for each tatoo, finalizing the transaction."
Why couldn't the NCAA dictate what the reasonable pricing is? Is there something unique about tat services?
Athletes can't can't get discounts, whether it is a purchasing a Lexus SUV for $1 or a tat for $1, or a haircut at Supercuts for $1. They can't get special privileges, goods or services for being an athlete other than those allowed. Lexus SUVs, tats and haircuts don't apply.