Dez responds to Tim Tebow

[Hawkeye0202]

 

[Mr_437]

Can see Tim's point, however, this is the system the US is made of... capitalism. Nothing will be ever be the same, even College Football (NCAA) needs a makeover...it's too much $ involved for the players not to get any.

It wasn't this much $ when the rules were in place. Again, everything must change eventually.

Dez with the fire text.

 

[Hoofbite]

Dez having a horrible upbringing is a piss poor argument for paying college athletes. Plenty of people from all parts of the spectrum have went through horrible upbringings, and 99.9% of them did so without having God-like athleticism to bail them out.

 

[dogunwo]

Dez having a horrible upbringing is a piss poor argument for paying college athletes. Plenty of people from all parts of the spectrum have went through horrible upbringings, and 99.9% of them did so without having God-like athleticism to bail them out.

You missed his point entirely it seems

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

Having a full ride scholarship doesn't come with free meals, free laundry, free gas, or an expense account. So allowing players to make money off of autographs, pictures, and commercials only seems logical.

A player couldn't even make money off of Instagram or Twitter prior to this ruling. And that to me almost sounds like slavery. What do you call when an individual no longer owns his own rights? I mean I cant sign my own name cause the college says so. Pfft.

 

[Flamma]

Dez makes a good point. He danced around it, but all he had to say was, easy for you to say, Tim.

 

[dargonking999]

Dez having a horrible upbringing is a piss poor argument for paying college athletes. Plenty of people from all parts of the spectrum have went through horrible upbringings, and 99.9% of them did so without having God-like athleticism to bail them out.

*Whoosh*

 

[Pola_pe_a]

Having a full ride scholarship doesn't come with free meals, free laundry, free gas, or an expense account. So allowing players to make money off of autographs, pictures, and commercials only seems logical.

A player couldn't even make money off of Instagram or Twitter prior to this ruling. And that to me almost sounds like slavery. What do you call when an individual no longer owns his own rights? I mean I cant sign my own name cause the college says so. Pfft.

All athletes, scholarship or not get a meal stipend when on away trips or they get fed all meals.

And full rides do include meal plans, room and board and course related materials I.e, books and lab fees etc.

To equate a hundred thousand dollars+ in free education to slavery is ridiculous. You can make a case for spending money stipends but it needs to happen across all the sports. Allowing only the big money sport players to make money would just lead to bigger problems.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

All athletes, scholarship or not get a meal stipend when on away trips or they get fed all meals.

And full rides do include meal plans, room and board and course related materials I.e, books and lab fees etc.

To equate a hundred thousand dollars+ in free education to slavery is ridiculous. You can make a case for spending money stipends but it needs to happen across all the sports. Allowing only the big money sport players to make money would just lead to bigger problems.

Time will tell if it leads to bigger problems. But an individual not owning their own likeness is pretty criminal.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

Time will tell if it leads to bigger problems. But an individual not owning their own likeness is pretty criminal.

Then don’t take the scholarship.

 

[JD_KaPow]

All athletes, scholarship or not get a meal stipend when on away trips or they get fed all meals.

And full rides do include meal plans, room and board and course related materials I.e, books and lab fees etc.

To equate a hundred thousand dollars+ in free education to slavery is ridiculous. You can make a case for spending money stipends but it needs to happen across all the sports. Allowing only the big money sport players to make money would just lead to bigger problems.

What problems would those be?

How about we let people make money if they can? You know, capitalism. Nothing prevents other students from making money in fields related to their intended career while they go to school, why should athletes be any different?

Also, why should a guy who wants to play in the NFL and is good enough to play in the NFL be forced to pretend to work toward a communications degree for a college that only wants him there so he can make money for them by playing football? (And he is forced, since the way the system is set up, playing in college is the only viable path to an NFL career). Why can't they just pay him directly instead of using the sham of a scholarship?

 

[DFWJC]

Having a full ride scholarship doesn't come with free meals, free laundry, free gas, or an expense account. So allowing players to make money off of autographs, pictures, and commercials only seems logical.

A player couldn't even make money off of Instagram or Twitter prior to this ruling. And that to me almost sounds like slavery. What do you call when an individual no longer owns his own rights? I mean I cant sign my own name cause the college says so. Pfft.

Yes it does come with free meals....WAY better than the average student.

I dont mind players getting more though.

But you lost me by even using the idiotic word “slavery”
These kids on full scholarships to schools that cost regular folks 50-75k PER YEAR to attend are MASSIVELY privileged and not forced to do anything.

But again, I do t even have an issue with jersey sales or whatever.

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

.

Yes it does come with free meals....WAY better than the average student.

I dont mind players getting more though.

But you lost me by even using the idiotic word “slavery”
These kids on full scholarships to schools that cost regular folks 50-75k PER YEAR to attend are MASSIVELY privileged and not forced to do anything.

But again, I do t even have an issue with jersey sales or whatever.

I tried to change slavery to criminal but I was too late on the edit. My bad. But 80k in scholarships times 85 players over a four year span equals 27 million dollars. But these colleges are making well over 60 million a season just off of football. I don't think they should get paid as in a paycheck. But the problem I had with the old rule was a player couldn't even make money off of signing his own signature or having followers on Twitter.

But again I apologize for the "S" word to everyone that had to read it.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

What problems would those be?

How about we let people make money if they can? You know, capitalism. Nothing prevents other students from making money in fields related to their intended career while they go to school, why should athletes be any different?

Also, why should a guy who wants to play in the NFL and is good enough to play in the NFL be forced to pretend to work toward a communications degree for a college that only wants him there so he can make money for them by playing football? (And he is forced, since the way the system is set up, playing in college is the only viable path to an NFL career). Why can't they just pay him directly instead of using the sham of a scholarship?

1. You are only considering income generating sports where making money is even a possibility. And of those sports only a small percentage are good enough to even get endorsements. Allowing a couple kids to make extra money for endorsements etc doesn’t address the vast majority of athletes. In reality the few kids able to do endorsements are good enough to move on to the pros anyway. They’ll get their money soon enough.

And if you don’t think allowing players to take money from private entities wouldn’t lead to problesm such as point shaving or throwing games all together then you need to research the Boston a college basketball team that was shaving points,

2. The age limit is an NFL rule, not an NCAA rule. And there are lesser leagues kids can go play in. Arena for example allows 18 year olds. The fact is D1 football is the best path but not the only path. And how many 18 year olds could even physically match up to an NFL player in his mid to late 20’s? Maybe one a year.

The NCAA can do better but allowing players to be paid is a stance I agree with. The transfer rules are ridiculous and should be overhauled. If a coach leaves, kids should be able to transfer without sitting out a year or being forced to play at a lower level. And they need to change some of the ridiculous rules about what are legal and illegal benefits. Ex: Bagel rule- athletes can get bagels but if they get a spread it becomes an illegal benefit. That’s just dumb.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

.

I tried to change slavery to criminal but I was too late on the edit. My bad. But 80k in scholarships times 85 players over a four year span equals 27 million dollars. But these colleges are making well over 60 million a season just off of football. I don't think they should get paid as in a paycheck. But the problem I had with the old rule was a player couldn't even make money off of signing his own signature or having followers on Twitter.

But again I apologize for the "S" word to everyone that had to read it.

You are only considering the money making sports, Colleges don’t make money on the VAST majority of athletics.

And only a couple kids on those squads are even good enough to earn endorsements. So you are championing the cause of a couple elite athletes that will have professional opportunities anyway. If you want to set up a universal revenue sharing system across all sports at a university that would provide additional stipends for the athletes fine. But to allow only a few to benefit isn’t the correct approach in my view,

 

[Oz-of-Cowboy-Country]

You are only considering the money making sports, Colleges don’t make money on the VAST majority of athletics.

And only a couple kids on those squads are even good enough to earn endorsements. So you are championing the cause of a couple elite athletes that will have professional opportunities anyway. If you want to set up a universal revenue sharing system across all sports at a university that would provide additional stipends for the athletes fine. But to allow only a few to benefit isn’t the correct approach in my view,

Now I get where you are coming from. Fair is fair. Hmm. Maybe one day they'll try and do both.

 

[Pola_pe_a]

If these kids are so hard up for spending money they can do what lots of other kids do, get a job or take a loan. Schools will help getting athletes the best jobs and student loans can be used for living expenses,

 

[Pola_pe_a]

Now I get where you are coming from. Fair is fair. Hmm. Maybe one day they'll try and do both.

I know the kids are getting used and I wouldn’t have a problem with some of the money being generated being dispersed to the student athletes but the benefit shouldn’t go to the couple stars. I guess that’s my point.

What is annoying is when people (not saying you) dismiss the value of a free education.

 

[JD_KaPow]

1. You are only considering income generating sports where making money is even a possibility. And of those sports only a small percentage are good enough to even get endorsements. Allowing a couple kids to make extra money for endorsements etc doesn’t address the vast majority of athletes. In reality the few kids able to do endorsements are good enough to move on to the pros anyway. They’ll get their money soon enough.

What does "soon enough" mean? If they can make money now, why aren't they allowed to? And what happens if they have a career-ending injury? Why should anybody but the market decide what's "soon enough?" Also, what do you mean by "doesn't address the vast majority of athletes?" What is there to address with them? If they can make money from endorsements, they can, and if they can't, they can't.

And if you don’t think allowing players to take money from private entities wouldn’t lead to problesm such as point shaving or throwing games all together then you need to research the Boston a college basketball team that was shaving points,

This makes zero sense. It's a much worse problem when players cannot be paid legally; the incentive to take money under the table is much greater when you can't get paid in an aboveboard way. The point shaving scandal you mentioned happened under the current system.

2. The age limit is an NFL rule, not an NCAA rule. And there are lesser leagues kids can go play in. Arena for example allows 18 year olds. The fact is D1 football is the best path but not the only path. And how many 18 year olds could even physically match up to an NFL player in his mid to late 20’s? Maybe one a year.

I'm not sure what you're arguing here. College is the only path to the NFL today (how many players in the NFL didn't play college ball?). That doesn't mean it has to be: there could be other systems, there just don't happen to be. But any kid with NFL ambitions knows he has to go play in college.

 

[ghst187]

I actually agree that student athletes should be able to profit some from their career as a collegiate athlete for several reasons...
1. The colleges, the towns they are in, the gas stations, video games, the ncaa, are all profiting off the likenesses of the top athletes via images, videos, jerseys, etc. it’s more than just ticket sales, much much more. So how is it fair that for four years or so that same athlete, who has their jersey being sold, their image pasting every brochure, their highlight videos profiting youtubers....be completely disallowed from making money? I will never forget Chris Weber talking about going into a gas station and not having gas money but see his jersey hanging for sale for $40. I don’t endorse paying athletes for their performances as that’s what the scholarship does, but disallowing them from making money off their success and their own image is just criminal and unamerican.
2. There is a corruption problem across college athletics. Maybe, allowing athletes to make money could possibly help with that?
3. Most college athletes aren’t big name, headed to the pros, folks. Many aren’t on full ride scholarships. Shouldn’t they be allowed to make some money for allowing the usage of their likenesses for advertising, etc?