2kool4skool;612081 wrote:We're talking about big-name football players specifically. No one has said that all college athletes deserve compensation.

And that's the hypocrisy of your argument. Either everyone deserves compensation or nobody does. It is NOT a professional sport; it's a AMATEUR sport, therefore, there aren't differing levels of compensation. Everybody gets the same.

2kool4skool;612081 wrote:Cool, then give the athlete a choice: free tuition, or a cut of their jersey sales. Fair?

Nope, the terms each player agreed to when they signed their letter of intent didn't offer them a choice. There are clear cut rules of this is the way it's going to be. Failure to comply with rules you originally agreed to will result in consequences by the NCAA. This is applicable in any other area of life...there's a reason we have a court system. You can't sign a contract, break the contract, and expect to NOT be held accountable. How hard is this to understand for you?

2kool4skool;612081 wrote:Correct, instead, the football players are expected to subsidize sports no one cares about.

It's a mutual relationship; players get access to multi-million dollar facilities, the best coaches in the country, huge amounts of national tv exposure, and a free education to boot. The University gets the profits, and it's up to them what they use the profits for. Just feel happy that most universities care enough about their athletic programs to subsidize other sports and even HAVE them, instead of just lining their own pockets.

2kool4skool;612081 wrote:Why?

For the same reason as my first response above. It's not a professional sport. It's an amateur sport. You can't make Terrelle Pryor a millionaire while he's in school by giving him a huge cut of his jersey sales just because they have the #2 on it, while Katie on the women's lacross team is living on a student's budget and can barely afford anything outside of basic necessities. That's about 150 lawsuits per year, against each university, waiting to happen. Do you think that all those kids NOT becoming rich while they're in school are just going to sit back and let 10-12 big name athletes get paid a ton of money and they get NOTHING? Exactly.

2kool4skool;612081 wrote:If you think THAT'S why the rules are set up the way they are by the NCAA, then I'm not sure what to tell you.

I don't think that, I know that. Regardless of how the rules are set up, the NCAA is going to make it's money. Do you think while all that shit was going on with Reggie Bush at USC, that the NCAA still wasn't making a bunch of money off of him? Of course they were. Regardless if Pryor makes zero, or 100k dollars off his name while he's in college, the NCAA is going to make way more off of him. 100k is chump change to the NCAA, especially when you start talking about TV contracts and BCS payouts. So if the NCAA isn't really losing any money regardless of what happens, the only reason the rules ARE in place is because of equality from the biggest star player in the most popular sport, to the most unknown pine-rider in a sport that 12 people on campus even know exists.

I'm sorry but I have a hard time defending these players, as it seems that so many people have decided to do.

Saying their families are down on their luck financially? I think pretty much everyone in this economy is. Part of me seriously doubts that Terelle took all the money and gave it directly to mom to buy food and pay the bills.

Red_Skin_Pride;612150 wrote:Either everyone deserves compensation or nobody does.

This is applicable in any other area of life

So in the NCAA, everyone, regardless of what they do or how well they do it, DESERVES equal compensation, and yet this is easily applicable to any other scenario. Interesting....

I agree that they are legally liable for the contract they signed. No one is arguing that. What we're doing is pointing out the corruptness of the NCAA, and the real reasoning behind these rules($$$.) This is why the system is exploited. Not because the kids are thugs, evil, etc. But because it's a system that so obviously lends its self to corruption.

There are very simple fixes: Allow any adult to enter the NFL draft and let the people who pay their salaries(owners) decide whether they want to employ them. Or pay athletes based on what they bring in to the school.

Unfortunately, these simple solutions harm one thing, and one thing only: the NCAA's pocketbook. And that's the reason they won't/haven't happened.

Just feel happy that most universities care enough about their athletic programs to subsidize other sports

Why would this make me happy? What would make me happy is the university not dumping ever-rising tuition money into supporting a women's Field Hockey team that no one cares about.

You can't make Terrelle Pryor a millionaire while he's in school by giving him a huge cut of his jersey sales just because they have the #2 on it, while Katie on the women's lacross team is living on a student's budget and can barely afford anything outside of basic necessities. That's about 150 lawsuits per year, against each university, waiting to happen.

There would be zero grounds for a lawsuit. For the same reason players can't sue currently over the NCAA's current rules. You were just talking a second ago about how the rules are the rules. That wouldn't change just because they're different from what you are used to.

Do you think that all those kids NOT becoming rich while they're in school are just going to sit back and let 10-12 big name athletes get paid a ton of money and they get NOTHING?

Some of my friends had much higher-paying internships while they were in college because they were better students. Is that not fair to me? All students should make the same regardless of their talent level no?

Regardless if Pryor makes zero, or 100k dollars off his name while he's in college, the NCAA is going to make way more off of him. 100k is chump change to the NCAA, especially when you start talking about TV contracts and BCS payouts

What great supporting evidence for the compassion of the NCAA.


If you want to argue that everyone deserves equal compensation for differing amounts of value, go ahead. But don't expect people to acknowledge it as fair.

the NCAA didn't just open up a can of worms with Newton... they blew up the bait shop

Its funny how alot of posters are saying the SEC did this, Cam did that, LSU did this, if it was the SEC.......
Man up and realize these players made dumb mistakes. It wasnt you guys who made the mistakes, it wasnt me who made the mistakes...so quit getting your panties in a wad on what I say about OSU players.

Also,


Since Pryor has to miss half the season next year, he should skip football and go out for basketball. He probably would get drafted higher in the NBA

Who hell is saying that OSU players didn't mess up? The point is still valid that the SEC is very dirty and corrupt, that is not disputable!!

...as I mentioned way back and in starting this thread...this might just be the tip of the iceberg.

^^^^

what sources do you have? and what else could there possibly be?

darby...I've been "associated" with OSU athletics since 1992. I only "see" these football and basketball players after they graduate and have no eligibility left. Job related. One of the football players who started and graduated in 2008 was over at the house tonight. I hate to say it, but this has been going on for some time.

I really fail to see the logic behind any of this.

In my opinion you have to draw a line here between what I think should be considered personal property and university owned property of the athletic department. Now to me, I think that the rings and awards, etc should be considered personal property and if they want to trade them to a prostitute to get herpes from her then so be it they have that right, I personally would value those items til the day I died but to each their own. The key distinction and what I think should be come down with the hammer of Thor on is Herron and his fucking dumbassedness decision to sell his uniform! What in the world is he thinking. Obviously you cannot do that retard. So I argue that this is way worse and that a junior who has not yet declared for the NFL draft does not have the right to get rid of a 'university owned' piece of apparel.

So basically, I think that you have to acknowledge that things earned such as trophies and rings are player property but everything else is fair game to go after them for. If Tom Brady wants to sell his Super Bowl rings do the Patriots get pissy and say they are 'their' property. This just confuses me.

Also fuck you Gene Smith. You handled that press conference like a joke. Be a man and be honest why they are playing in the Sugar Bowl. Everyone knows the answer, even the guy asking the question. He wanted to see if you had the balls to admit it. Which you failed at.

Cleveland Buck;611980 wrote:All these guys had to do was ask for $180,000 to sign with a college. They wouldn't be suspended or punished at all, and then they wouldn't have had to sell their shit to get some cash. Only problem is, they would all play in the SEC.

Two wrongs don't make a right. The Newton thing was disgusting, but TP and the guys should not have been breaking rules. Obviously they are aware of the rules and if they could have just waited a year they could have sold them and there would have been no issues.

I just hate that some Buckeye fans are responding by saying "oh yeah, well Auburn got away with this... or this school got away with that." I want no part of that.

Oh, and another point. I am favor of genocide for anyone who actually believes this shit was sold so the money could be given to their families. You really are not that stupid right? You do know that there is a difference in what they say to a NCAA/OSU interview and the truth, right?!

Every time I see TP he has about $1,000 of clothes and various things on. So you can suck my dick TP, because I don't care for being lied to asshole.

CinciX12;612287 wrote:...

In my opinion you have to draw a line here between what I think should be considered personal property and university owned property of the athletic department. Now to me, I think that the rings and awards, etc should be considered personal property and if they want to trade them to a prostitute to get herpes from her then so be it they have that right, I personally would value those items til the day I died but to each their own. ...

Why wouldn't every player simply sell those pieces of "personal property" to boosters for $20,000 - $100,000 a pop and thus get paid for playing college football? Earn a ring for your performance on the field and turn it into cash.

Keeping that from happening is why the rule exists.

Some of you screaming from the mountain tops that the NCAA needs to "pay" players really need to research Title IX. Once you do that, come back and we can then discuss this further. After you study up, you will realize that Title IX virtually assures that this will never happen. (cliff notes version-- women get equal chances/benefits as men)

Fab1b;612242 wrote:Who hell is saying that OSU players didn't mess up? The point is still valid that the SEC is very dirty and corrupt, that is not disputable!!

Indisputable, but also irrelevant to the situation at hand. It's just a means of rationalization.

ts1227;612300 wrote:Indisputable, but also irrelevant to the situation at hand. It's just a means of rationalization.

No it's just a jab and Cats and the truth. Many times on these threads I have said these Buckeyes have broken the rules and are at least being punished for it! I am not defending them or trying to send blame elsewhere.

Be Nice;612283 wrote:darby...I've been "associated" with OSU athletics since 1992. I only "see" these football and basketball players after they graduate and have no eligibility left. Job related. One of the football players who started and graduated in 2008 was over at the house tonight. I hate to say it, but this has been going on for some time.

I just don't understand how someone in that compliance office doens't know that this sort of stuff is going on

CinciX12;612287 wrote:I really fail to see the logic behind any of this.

In my opinion you have to draw a line here between what I think should be considered personal property and university owned property of the athletic department. Now to me, I think that the rings and awards, etc should be considered personal property and if they want to trade them to a prostitute to get herpes from her then so be it they have that right ,

It has nothing to do with personal property. It has to do with using one's athletic fame to benefit financially. You simply cannot do it. Obviously, they wouldn't have had those items without the athletics and so, selling them is capitalizing on their athletic fame.

ccrunner609;612212 wrote:Where these guys messed up was that they didnt have their dad pimp them out for $180,000.

Fuck Cam Newton and his dad

Why do people keep comparing these two situations? How does a third party's failed attempt to benefit from someone's fame (unbeknownst to that someone) have anything to do with a player, himself, successfully using his fame to pocket cash?

2kool4skool;612211 wrote: I agree that they are legally liable for the contract they signed. No one is arguing that. What we're doing is pointing out the corruptness of the NCAA, and the real reasoning behind these rules($$$.) This is why the system is exploited. Not because the kids are thugs, evil, etc. But because it's a system that so obviously lends its self to corruption.

Strangely, the reason for rules like this are to limit that corruption. I know there's a lot of money that is made, but the rules seek to maintain some semblance of a level playing field. Obviously there are some schools with built in recruiting advantages - from facilities to location to tradition. However, I really don't think there's anyone that wants the schools who can simply pay the most players the most money to buy all the top players. You think there are some cupcakes now...try professionalizing college football and see how many decent games there are in a season.

2kool4skool;612211 wrote:There are very simple fixes: Allow any adult to enter the NFL draft and let the people who pay their salaries(owners) decide whether they want to employ them. Or pay athletes based on what they bring in to the school.

Unfortunately, these simple solutions harm one thing, and one thing only: the NCAA's pocketbook. And that's the reason they won't/haven't happened.

You do understand that the NFL draft age/requirement is not in any way an NCAA rule? The NCAA has absolutely no control over that. As for paying athletes based on what they bring in to the school, which OSU player in the last 50 years would get the most money. Name one player who could be taken off of a team that would cause OSU football fans to stop going to games. There is no way you could even begin to pay players based on "what they bring in to the school" because you don't know what any individual truly brings to the school.

2kool4skool;612211 wrote:Why would this make me happy? What would make me happy is the university not dumping ever-rising tuition money into supporting a women's Field Hockey team that no one cares about.

There's where the big, evil empire that is the NCAA doesn't get enough credit. YOU don't care about Field Hockey, or maybe Diving, or any number of other sports. But when you can get past the money-hungry-monster characterization, THOUSANDS of athletes benefit tremendously from that money. And that is a good thing. The problem with this "I bring money in" is the selfishness that is contrary to the mission of the NCAA. Why can't it be, "I represent my school, I help provide opportunities for all of these people"?

ts1227;611675 wrote:The NCAA does not formally recognize a national champion in football, so it's not up to them.

Wrong. They recognize 3 national champions in 3 separate divisions. However, they do not recognize the FBS champion as such.

Jughead;612317 wrote:Wrong. They recognize 3 national champions in 3 separate divisions. However, they do not recognize the FBS champion as such.

smartass. You know what I meant, lol

So techincally our National Champions this year so far are:

DIII-Wisconsin Whitewater
DII-Minnesota Duluth
FCS-Delaware/Eastern Washington

Con_Alma;612298 wrote:Why wouldn't every player simply sell those pieces of "personal property" to boosters for $20,000 - $100,000 a pop and thus get paid for playing college football? Earn a ring for your performance on the field and turn it into cash.

Keeping that from happening is why the rule exists.

This is 100% correct. People may get emotional about the stuff these guys sold, which is understandable. But the underlying issue is that they can't sell it. It isn't any different than accepting money to sign with a program for money.

ccrunner609;611989 wrote:So let me get this straight......the OSU and B10 gives these kids rings and awards for playing in their football games nad then they are punished for doing with their stuff what they want......I dont get it. What if they just had a garage sale and sold i?

God... I wish people could get/understand this. You CAN'T sell things (when you're in the position that they are in) because you could have boosters for out ridiculous stacks of cash for something and act that they are "buying the memorabilia" when in fact they are really just "reimbursing" the player for attending their school.

You're opening up a whole can of worms by trying to pass this off as "acceptable."

Fab1b;611995 wrote:I think as long as they have eligibilty they can't sell those till after!

Correct.

Manhattan Buckeye;611998 wrote:They can sell it now, they just can't keep their full eligibility. These guys aren't facing criminal sanctions. They did what they wanted with their stuff, which was against the rules...so they have to deal with it.

I think the NCAA is just as arbitrary and silly as the next college football fan, but college athletes can't sell the stuff they get - otherwise boosters would just pay them in their "garage sale."

Bingo! A+ post. This guy gets it.