Discussion in 'Sports Zone' started by ABQCOWBOY, Apr 7, 2014.
Dietary requirements have nothing to do with this conversation.
What in the world are you talking about? There is proof of the statements. Multiple athletes who live the life have made statements to this effect... that is proof. And the NCAA has now said athletes can have unlimited meals and snacks... more proof.
You're saying they're outlandish because you're taking them literally.
Were you literally starving when you said you were starving? I don't care when you said it, and what your wife says to you is irrelevant to the point being made.
They may not need to be eating before they go to bed. Again it's beside the point. The point is, it's not up to ABQCowboy, peplaw06, the NCAA or anyone else to dictate when and how an athlete eats. If they want to eat, they should be able to eat. What other group of grown men get told when, what and where they can eat?
THe fact that you have to deliberately put words in my mouth proves you have no rational counter-argument. I never once said "they had everything paid for." I said they had room and board paid for and anyone who claims they "went to bed hungry" is full of crap. The last thing a major college program is going to do is let their superstar athletes go unfed.
Actually, they totally do. When we're talking about an athlete "going to bed hungry" discussing diet is perfectly relevant.
If we take Napier's definition, I "go to bed hungry" about 5 or 6 nights per week.
Anyone who is a professional athlete - or amateur athlete competing at a high level - gets told all those things.
Proof of what? That they want to be able to eat McDonalds at 12:00 PM at night when they are hungry. That's not proof. That's a kid talking about things that are probably not good for him IMO. Whatever it is, it's not starving at night and it's not the fault of the University or the NCAA.
I'm saying they are outlandish because they are being used to support a justification for payment. That very different.
No. I was just hungry because I had not eaten supper and my Wife was right. I had made a decision not to eat.
It's exactly the point. The Coaches and Trainers absolutely do have the right to regulate diet for Athletes and the funny part of this is that ABQ or Pep or the NCAA or the players who want to get paid will not have a say in it either, just as they do not have a say in it in the NFL. It's a job now and you know what happens when you don't stay in condition in the NFL? You get cut. Getting paid is not going to change that one bit. It happens in every professional sport on a daily basis.
So, by your own admission, we are not meant to take these statements literally and you agree no college D1 athlete is going to bed hungry.
Well that pretty much wraps up this conversation. Glad you came around.
No, I'm saying he's not literally starving... He's gone to bed hungry, and I don't doubt that for a second.
Getting told things and being actually prevented from doing things are completely different.
No one's saying they "go unfed." Now who's putting words in whose mouth?
So you think the NCAA actually regulates the caloric intake of these student-athletes? Wow, guess it's worse than I thought.
Based on what?
No. I think that it has been specifically stated that the NCAA does NOT have anything to do with the regulation of diet, where College Athletes are concerned. In fact, I believe that I posted earlier that dietary regiments/requirements were based on Coaching, Nutritionists, trainers and Federal Standards in general. No mention of NCAA anywhere so far as I know.
You do know that "proof" can be the statement of a person right? It's certainly not the speculation of what you or I think he's talking about, whether it's McDonald's or not. I take him at his word... you speculate he's lying based on no proof. You're not always going to have eye-witness proof of a thing. Neither of us know without a doubt what he goes through.
So anything he says is a lie because he wants to get paid? Nice.
OK then. So you've exaggerated the severity of your hunger before..... FOR SHAME!!
If the player gets out of shape, he gets out of shape. It should be his decision though, and not the decision of ABQ, peplaw06, or the NCAA as to what he eats and when. He has to deal with the consequences of his choices, but they should be his choices. When you get ABQ, pep and the NCAA making the decisions, you get one-size-fits-all restrictions and those don't work. When that happens, you get athletes who are allowed more food than they need and some that are prevented from having as much food as they need... you get players who go to bed hungry.
Then why did Oklahoma self-report to the NCAA that their players had eaten more than the acceptable amount of pasta at that dinner event? Was it because of "dietary requirements," or was it because the NCAA strictly regulates the amount of food in general a student-athlete can eat?
And you do know that a statement of a person, which is fabricated is not considered proof right? You are welcome to take him at his word but there is more then just passing proof that more then adequate nourishment is provided to these Athletes. Based on this, you should not expect others to simply follow suit. I do not take him at his word without more proof.
Anything anybody says is not necessarily a lie if money is the motivation but anything anybody says, if money is the motivation is subject to examination. You don't have to like that but you have to accept that because that's how it works in any forum, legal or otherwise.
Yes, and I've been told to shut up and stop crying about stuff that is of my own doing. That is correct and I agree. It was shameful of me to act in that manner. I am very lucky that I have a very good Wife that keeps me honest in such matters.
But you see, he has already made that decision, based on his signing of a Letter of Intent. So you see, contrary to what you may think, ABQ, Pep and the NCAA were never in any position to influence the sizing of this at any point. That's just wishful thinking.
I am not familiar with the details of this situation. However, I am confident that there is a logical explanation. Perhaps if you posted the details of the report or investigation, I could review them and provide a satisfactory response to your question?
No. That's wrong.
That's why I'm saying it's been verified by statements from other athletes and by the actions of the NCAA. That's called corroborating evidence.
Your logic is twisted. A person is subject to examination regardless of the motivation. The fact that money is a topic of discussion doesn't mean they're lying or saying outlandish things. The NCAA also has monetary interests involved in this discussion, but you believe them and not Napier... why is that?
You really need to lighten up. It's not "shameful" or dishonest to say you're starving when you're not. It's a colloquialism that's not meant to be taken literally.
Are you arguing that the letter of intent is a contract that regulates the diets of the student-athlete? Really? That's the tactic you want to take in this argument?