Hawkeye0202
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 23,410
- Reaction score
- 43,094
You missed his point entirely it seemsDez 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.
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.
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.
Time will tell if it leads to bigger problems. But an individual not owning their own likeness is pretty criminal.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.
What problems would those be?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.
Yes it does come with free meals....WAY better than the average student.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.
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.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.
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?
.
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.
Now I get where you are coming from. Fair is fair. Hmm. Maybe one day they'll try and do both.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.
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.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.
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.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,
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.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.