Fly4Fun;1487886 wrote:Right in what way specifically? Right that players should be able to sell their autographs?

<br><br>Yes.<br>
<br>

If players are still amateur but not paid (besides scholarship) all the boosters of big schools that have money to throw away on sports will just have a bidding war on athletes under the guise of paying autographs.

<br><br>So?<br>
<br>

If players become a true professional athlete and schools are allowed to pay, are there restrictions? Is it like the professional sports where there is a cap? How is that cap designed calculated as there are gross discrepancies in cash flow of NCAA FBS schools. There are very few schools that make enough $$ to keep their athletic department in the black.

<br><br>I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all of the answers of how to administer a different system, but have every confidence that a workable system could be created. The current one is working very well. Said no one ever.<br>
<br>

The real problems come in when you begin to think about other non football or men's basketball athletes. Those sports generally derive very little revenue and are supported by football/basketball. Do those kids get paid? Or do only the sports get paid that earn money? If money is then being funneled to only those players of football and basketball the scholarships (as little as they are sometimes) for other sports will certainly go away as most schools wouldn't be able to afford that.

<br><br>I've never seen a decent answer to the question of how a national-class rifle or fencing team enhances the status of a university in any measurable way. If the sport can support itself, by all means have the sport. Otherwise, participating at the club level isn't a sin.<br>
<br>

Also, Once you're paying the athlete any chance of them being "students" is gone as the primary focus is on the play as they are being rewarded for that with cash instead of being rewarded with their play for a college education (you know the student aspect of student-athlete). Or does pay somehow also factor in GPA and graduation track to keep it student oriented as well? Or do the schools drop any idea of them being students and have these players associated with the University by name only as a different football and basketball league apart from the NFL and NBA.

<br><br>I'm personally done playing along with the group hypocrisy that these "student-athletes" are just like the rest of their classmates. They are not, what is the motivation to keep pretending that they are?<br>
<br>

How well do you think a second rate professional football league will be supported by the American public? A lot of what people say they love about college football is about tradition, loyalty (you pick a school and 90%+ of people stay their for their "career" as opposed to free agency, trades, etc.), playing for the love of the game instead of the all mighty $$ which would possibly be lost in a professional version of college football. And to note, other professional football leagues haven't worked in any other attempts previously.

<br><br>Same answer as the one above. We already have that, and have a group pretend session every Saturday that it is not so.<br>
<br>

There are a lot of questions ranging from viability of another professional league to what to do with the other non-revenue sports that would have to be answered or at least thought about before you can all of the sudden start chipping away at the current system.<br><br>People act like just letting players sell their autograph wouldn't be a big deal or exploited in any way besides a player earning some money. We've all seen what boosters have done at various institutes even when doing such things has always been against the rules.<br>
<br>
People act like switching to a payment system for athletes would be an easy transition and not disrupt and possibly jeopardize the continuance of not only non-revenue college sports but the revenue sports as well.

<br><br>No question. Nothing easy is worth a damn (W.W. Hayes). Something being difficult is never a valid reason not to try.<br> What's easy is to continue to pretend that these athletes are just the kids next door whose primary goal is a college education and they just happen to have a special skill that we've decided for some reason to reward with free tuition. It's nonsense, and we all know it.

If you pay one scholly athlete, you pay all scholly athletes, regardless of sport. IMO, not a good idea to open that can of worms.

^^^

Agreed, and Title IX will likely mandate that women get paid the same. If someone wants to capitalize on themselves, they can go to other countries or just wait and get drafted. There is a reason why athletes don't. Overseas leagues are very overrated as far as quality of life goes, and you get a good deal just going to college in the US.

queencitybuckeye;1487891 wrote:So?

So? What is one thing that almost all American sports have? Rules regarding compensation to adjust for competitive leagues. If you go to a outside of the system/back alley compensation structure, the talent will end up at the schools with the most boosters with the deepest pockets hurting the competitive balance even more so than the current disparity. At least right now schools have a limited amount of scholarships (a smaller amount than it has been in football's history) and this has lead to more competition and greater popularity.

Allowing boosters to just pay however much they want under the guise of handshakes would completely destroy that.

queencitybuckeye;1487891 wrote:I'll be the first to admit that I don't know all of the answers of how to administer a different system, but have every confidence that a workable system could be created. The current one is working very well. Said no one ever.

I don't doubt that there can be professional systems for football. We have one already, it's called the NFL. What's happened when other leagues have tried to cash in on the market of professional football? They've folded.

queencitybuckeye;1487891 wrote:I've never seen a decent answer to the question of how a national-class rifle or fencing team enhances the status of a university in any measurable way. If the sport can support itself, by all means have the sport. Otherwise, participating at the club level isn't a sin.

It's not just obscure sports like that, but ALL sports besides football and basketball (it varies from school to school on which ones earn more cash). You might as well wipe out women's athletics and men's non-football and non-basketball as generally those sports all run in the red. Most athletic departments already run in the red as a whole.

queencitybuckeye;1487891 wrote:I'm personally done playing along with the group hypocrisy that these "student-athletes" are just like the rest of their classmates. They are not, what is the motivation to keep pretending that they are?

It's not a hypocrisy. I would say that 99% (I'm estimating this number, but looking at this it seems like a fair estimate http://www.businessinsider.com/odds-college-athletes-become-professionals-2012-2?op=1) of NCAA student-athletes are actually student athletes. Most don't go on to compete professionally. The majority have to get a job somewhere and got a free education to help with that!

But beond those facts, most student-athletes are just like everyone else. It's only a few that aren't. I only swam 1 year, but I was still a D1 athlete and I can tell you my life wasn't too much different from those of my non-athlete friends. Granted I had to be up at 5AM 3 times a week and had to practice as well in the afternoon after class instead of starting drinking right away or just lounging around. My life wasn't too different.

"Blah, blah blah, you're just a swimmer." I had a friend who was a football player at OSU (Alex Barrow; a DE, played through his Junior year). Guess what? He wasn't the best, but he saw the field occasionally. He ended up doing something with his time at college earned a degree then got a job. I wasn't at OSU with him as I went to school at another place. But he still hung out with our mutual friends and was just like a normal college student when I visited my friends at OSU.

It's a very small % of athletes that aren't like that.

vball10set;1487901 wrote:If you pay one scholly athlete, you pay all scholly athletes, regardless of sport. IMO, not a good idea to open that can of worms.

This, but no way is this economically feasible. A lot of schools can't even afford to give scholarships to all of their players. Non-football/basketball men's sports tend to get the short end of the stick when it comes to scholarships. I had a swimming friend who won state titles in high school, ended up winning an NCAA D1 title, and swam at multiple olympic trials (never made the squad) that didn't get any scholarship offers when heading out of HS to college.

Manhattan Buckeye;1487904 wrote:^^^

Agreed, and Title IX will likely mandate that women get paid the same. If someone wants to capitalize on themselves, they can go to other countries or just wait and get drafted. There is a reason why athletes don't. Overseas leagues are very overrated as far as quality of life goes, and you get a good deal just going to college in the US.

I personally don't like Title IX as the way some schools choose to comply with it (cutting sports, which is the easy way to comply instead of reworking the budget), but it would certainly apply to any type of payment system people are proposing.

Go argue that dead horse BS somewhere else fellas...this thread is about kicking Johnny Fuckup in the balls as many times as is humanly possible.

Interesting interview with Chris Fowler, he talks about Johnny Football and the issue of compensation for pesona and IMO completely nails it:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130820/media-circus-chris-fowler/?sct=hp_wr_a2&eref=sihp

"[LEFT]I do think it is a complicated argument and I wonder if everyone who advocates athletes owning the ability to sell their signatures and memorabilia, I wonder if they have thought that out. Because the idea does not work and here's why: If an athlete could legally sell autographed stuff, then every booster club could set up autograph signings and who is to decide what market value the signature of an incoming recruit would have? In other words, fill-in-the-blank school would have someone step forward and say "I'll pay $50,000 for every time you sign something." Well, you have just funneled cash to the player in a quasi-legal way. Once you have opened up the ability for an athlete to make money off his signature or memorabilia, there is no controlling it. I don't know if people have thought that through. As arcane as the NCAA rulebook is, a lot of the rules in it exist because abuses have existed from Day One."


[/LEFT]

Well said MB...and now its time for the NCAA to bring the hammer down hard and make an example of this turd. Send a message to all athletes by strongly penalizing Johnny Fuckup with a 3 - 5 game suspension.

Manhattan Buckeye;1489318 wrote:Interesting interview with Chris Fowler, he talks about Johnny Football and the issue of compensation for pesona and IMO completely nails it:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130820/media-circus-chris-fowler/?sct=hp_wr_a2&eref=sihp

"[LEFT]I do think it is a complicated argument and I wonder if everyone who advocates athletes owning the ability to sell their signatures and memorabilia, I wonder if they have thought that out. Because the idea does not work and here's why: If an athlete could legally sell autographed stuff, then every booster club could set up autograph signings and who is to decide what market value the signature of an incoming recruit would have? In other words, fill-in-the-blank school would have someone step forward and say "I'll pay $50,000 for every time you sign something." Well, you have just funneled cash to the player in a quasi-legal way. Once you have opened up the ability for an athlete to make money off his signature or memorabilia, there is no controlling it. I don't know if people have thought that through. As arcane as the NCAA rulebook is, a lot of the rules in it exist because abuses have existed from Day One."


[/LEFT]

That's the point I was making above with the statement of boosters having bidding wars on players under the guise of autographs.

I just think there is too much "gut reaction" when it comes to this topic and not enough people trying to clearly think through the issue. That's the fault of sensationalism journalism/media who care more about ratings and inciting people than actually having a constructive discussion.

Manhattan Buckeye;1489318 wrote:Interesting interview with Chris Fowler, he talks about Johnny Football and the issue of compensation for pesona and IMO completely nails it:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130820/media-circus-chris-fowler/?sct=hp_wr_a2&eref=sihp

"[LEFT]I do think it is a complicated argument and I wonder if everyone who advocates athletes owning the ability to sell their signatures and memorabilia, I wonder if they have thought that out. Because the idea does not work and here's why: If an athlete could legally sell autographed stuff, then every booster club could set up autograph signings and who is to decide what market value the signature of an incoming recruit would have? In other words, fill-in-the-blank school would have someone step forward and say "I'll pay $50,000 for every time you sign something." Well, you have just funneled cash to the player in a quasi-legal way. Once you have opened up the ability for an athlete to make money off his signature or memorabilia, there is no controlling it. I don't know if people have thought that through. As arcane as the NCAA rulebook is, a lot of the rules in it exist because abuses have existed from Day One."


[/LEFT]

His view is spot on and the reason that it will never work.

Funny how the talking heads are wondering whether Manziel will start the season or not. They have nothing to lose by starting him.

Its interesting that Mandell has been spun into some kind of victim...SMFH.

se-alum;1492059 wrote:Funny how the talking heads are wondering whether Manziel will start the season or not. They have nothing to lose by starting him.

Yeah, the concept of NOT starting him is funny as hell. They have two choices:

1. Start him and hope for the best in a situation where they either (likely) have a really good season or end up having to forfeit a bunch of wins.

OR

2. Don't start him and spend the entire season as a complete and total afterthought that no one outside of the state of Texas cares about.

Sounds like although A&M and Manziel aren't on the same page on a lot of things, they are on the strategy with the NCAA. Give 'em a load of perjury and send them home.

Just heard on the SVP show that Manziel will be suspended for the 1ST HALF against Rice. And that will be the end of the NCAA cases against him.

Seriously just a half? That is joke. Just suspend him for the whole game or even better just say you didn't find anything.

Iliketurtles;1492534 wrote:Just heard on the SVP show that Manziel will be suspended for the 1ST HALF against Rice. And that will be the end of the NCAA cases against him.

Seriously just a half? That is joke. Just suspend him for the whole game or even better just say you didn't find anything.

The NCAA is a fucking joke. That being said, since there was no smoking gun, and the memorabilia dealers wouldn't testify, there really wasn't anything they could do. However, I do agree with you on the 1st half suspension...seriously? :rolleyes:

Joke.

Absolute joke.

Dude signed 4k pieces of flair for fun, and is willing to take a half suspension... for what exactly?

If he deserves half a game, the tOSU tat gang should have been suspended for a series, or a single play.

derek bomar;1492547 wrote:Dude signed 4k pieces of flair for fun, and is willing to take a half suspension... for what exactly?

The best part about this is Manziel has demonstrated time and time again that he is all about himself. He was constantly going to high profile sporting events and taking pictures and trying to be seen with big names. He was part of the Manning Passing Academy but couldn't even be bothered to stop partying to participate in that. But we are to believe that he would sign hundreds to thousands of memorabilia for a few certain individuals that he has no connection to for hour long plus sessions for nothing but the goodness of his selfless heart??

Never ever try and guess what the NCAA will rule.
Joke.....

I don't get the half game at all. Either they have something on him and he needs to be suspended longer or they found nothing which results in no suspension.

Rotinaj;1492558 wrote:I don't get the half game at all. Either they have something on him and he needs to be suspended longer or they found nothing which results in no suspension.

This. It's as if they just suspended him a half to show they did something.

I'm eagerly looking forward for the day when a college basketball player gets suspending from the beginning of the season until the first TV timeout of his first game after this ruling.

NCAA bringing the lulz once again!