2013 LGP College Football Thread

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby pfim on Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:52 pm

PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


Texas generated $103 million last year from their football program alone in 2011-2012. More than most NHL teams.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Aug 06, 2013 4:55 pm

PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,456
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby joopen on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:01 pm

slappybrown wrote:
PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.


I would love to see an 18 year old try to play in the NFL... he would literally die, literally.
joopen
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,735
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:17 pm
Location: right behind you

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Crankshaft on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:05 pm

joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:
PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.


I would love to see an 18 year old try to play in the NFL... he would literally die, literally.


Image
Crankshaft
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,959
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 12:35 pm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby joopen on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:09 pm

I honestly want to know how hard it is to just enjoy being a rock star on campus while having no expenses and no worries about life while preparing for a multi-million dollar career. The NCAA makes a buck now but he will too when he is a PROFESSIONAL.
joopen
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,735
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:17 pm
Location: right behind you

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:09 pm

joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:
PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.


I would love to see an 18 year old try to play in the NFL... he would literally die, literally.

Maybe, maybe not. But if the NFL/NBA are going to use the NCAA as de facto minor leagues, and the NCAA is going to rake in enormous income into the billions safeguard its non-profit status by inventing the legal fiction of "student-athlete", maybe kick a little to the dudes who pull in 100K on Saturdays and sell the jerseys and jack up the TV rights, no?
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,456
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:10 pm

joopen wrote:I honestly want to know how hard it is to just enjoy being a rock star on campus while having no expenses and no worries about life while preparing for a multi-million dollar career. The NCAA makes a buck now but he will too when he is a PROFESSIONAL.

Why can't he sell his signature?

He's a professional now. He's not getting paid for it. That's the only difference. You've bought the NCAA's horse **** hook line and sinker if you think he's an "amateur."

What if he tears his ACL tomorrow?
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,456
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby joopen on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:23 pm

slappybrown wrote:
joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:
PhantomJB93 wrote:
columbia wrote:There are those (including here) who believe that a scholarship is sufficient compensation, although I'm not one of them.


I just fail to see how getting to attend a school for free that most people pay upwards of 20k a year for isn't enough compensation.


I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.


I would love to see an 18 year old try to play in the NFL... he would literally die, literally.

Maybe, maybe not. But if the NFL/NBA are going to use the NCAA as de facto minor leagues, and the NCAA is going to rake in enormous income into the billions safeguard its non-profit status by inventing the legal fiction of "student-athlete", maybe kick a little to the dudes who pull in 100K on Saturdays and sell the jerseys and jack up the TV rights, no?


You mean like the cost of going to that institution? That's paid for them. The cost of living? That's paid for them. How about getting every advantage to succeed at everything you do there (educational and athletic)? Yup they get those too.

The estimated cost of attending Texas A&M for a year is $21,500. So he makes at least that much every year. Plus the future value of having a diploma (yea he's not getting a diploma). How about the free exposure he gets? He doesn't have to do anything but play football and go to class enough not to flunk out. As soon as he does that for 3 years he can then pursue his career which will make him millions of $. The average college student takes 4 years to get on to their career. That career will not afford them the income level of what poor, unpaid Johnny will get a year earlier.
joopen
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,735
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:17 pm
Location: right behind you

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby joopen on Tue Aug 06, 2013 5:33 pm

slappybrown wrote:
joopen wrote:I honestly want to know how hard it is to just enjoy being a rock star on campus while having no expenses and no worries about life while preparing for a multi-million dollar career. The NCAA makes a buck now but he will too when he is a PROFESSIONAL.

Why can't he sell his signature?

He's a professional now. He's not getting paid for it. That's the only difference. You've bought the NCAA's horse **** hook line and sinker if you think he's an "amateur."

What if he tears his ACL tomorrow?


I would guess he has surgery and plays football again. Oh, plus the surgery would be paid for too. If it was so bad he couldn't play again well then he should be thankful that he has the opportunity to continue his education and get his degree for free, or at a minimum for half price. Accidents and injuries happen to everyone in every walk of life. What if a medical student who can be a surgeon has his hand smashed tomorrow? Yea it sucks that there are risks (Lattimore) but the rewards obviously outweigh the risks.

He's not a professional now. There is no way in all that is holy that a 18 19 or 20 year old would survive the NFL. It would be very few and far between who could. I don't care what the NCAA is feeding. I wasn't allowed to accept any money to help my high school run a camp for kids when I was a damn DIII football player. He can't because the rules allowing him to pursue his professional football career says he can't. In a year he can sell it as many times as he wants. He has to deal with it for A YEAR before being handsomely compensated before even performing at his job.
joopen
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,735
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:17 pm
Location: right behind you

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rylan on Tue Aug 06, 2013 10:58 pm

I don't think they should make money off merchandise if his name is not on the jerseys (which it isn't, just "his" number which is not the same) but if he wants to have an autograph session where he makes money he should be allowed. If it is legal, it should be allowed. That includes selling merchandise, autographs, and appearances. And as long as the student is academically capable of staying in school, there should be no limitations on how he spends his free time.
Rylan
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,995
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:07 am
Location: Dead and Without Love

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Staggy on Wed Aug 07, 2013 1:04 am

Although I don't disagree with the post above, as it relates to Manziel a stupid rule is still a rule. Everyone knows you can't sell autographs/merchandise/etc, he's an idiot for blatantly violating the rules and risking his eligibility.
Staggy
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,846
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:33 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby DontToewsMeBro on Wed Aug 07, 2013 2:31 am

He's an idiot for doing it? Take how many players you know that have gotten caught for something like this, multiply it by 200, and that's how many have done it and gotten away with it. This is probably a pretty low risk thing to do honestly.
DontToewsMeBro
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,201
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 6:31 pm

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby PhantomJB93 on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:34 am

DontToewsMeBro wrote:He's an idiot for doing it? Take how many players you know that have gotten caught for something like this, multiply it by 200, and that's how many have done it and gotten away with it. This is probably a pretty low risk thing to do honestly.


Even so, he probably would have never been caught for this if he wasn't doing all the other stupid stuff that has caused the media to look into every aspect of his off-field life the past few months. So he's still an idiot.
PhantomJB93
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,442
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2011 8:21 pm
Location: Blacksburg, VA

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby pfim on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:43 am

joopen wrote:I honestly want to know how hard it is to just enjoy being a rock star on campus while having no expenses and no worries about life while preparing for a multi-million dollar career. The NCAA makes a buck now but he will too when he is a PROFESSIONAL.


It's not how "difficult" his life is, it's that these schools are using these kids as a money-making machine. Texas makes a $70 million PROFIT on its football team each year. How many (legitimate) businesses in the world have a 70% bottom line margin? I'm sure many more would if they could pay their employees peanuts compared to revenues.

Not all these players will be professionals, very few will be multi-millionaires. And I think you're assumptions about having no expenses and no worries about life are way off base.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Staggy on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:43 am

DontToewsMeBro wrote:He's an idiot for doing it? Take how many players you know that have gotten caught for something like this, multiply it by 200, and that's how many have done it and gotten away with it. This is probably a pretty low risk thing to do honestly.


Umm yes. He's the most famous college athlete in the country, did he really think it wouldn't eventually come out? And if you do decide to take money, it's probably not a good idea to sit court side at Miami Heat games and take random flights to Toronto to party with Drake.
Staggy
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 2,846
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2011 1:33 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby pfim on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:44 am

I wouldn't say he's an idiot for doing it, he knew the risks and felt the reward outweighed them.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:48 am

joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:
joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:I don't know, maybe the market should decide? As in, people should get paid what others are willing to pay them for their services?

You know, like when CBS agreed to pay the SEC $55mm per year through the middle of the next decade for its games alone?

Or when CBS/Turner agreed to pay 10.8 BILLION for the NCAA tournament (about $750 million PER YEAR)?

Or like when I type Manziel into NCAA Shop and they sell me his jersey for 70 bucks and he gets nothing out of it?

Its a joke. If you want to play professional basketball or football in this country you have no choice but to play for the NCAA for less than your market rate. At least in basketball they limit the sham to one season.


I would love to see an 18 year old try to play in the NFL... he would literally die, literally.

Maybe, maybe not. But if the NFL/NBA are going to use the NCAA as de facto minor leagues, and the NCAA is going to rake in enormous income into the billions safeguard its non-profit status by inventing the legal fiction of "student-athlete", maybe kick a little to the dudes who pull in 100K on Saturdays and sell the jerseys and jack up the TV rights, no?


You mean like the cost of going to that institution? That's paid for them. The cost of living? That's paid for them. How about getting every advantage to succeed at everything you do there (educational and athletic)? Yup they get those too.

The estimated cost of attending Texas A&M for a year is $21,500. So he makes at least that much every year. Plus the future value of having a diploma (yea he's not getting a diploma). How about the free exposure he gets? He doesn't have to do anything but play football and go to class enough not to flunk out. As soon as he does that for 3 years he can then pursue his career which will make him millions of $. The average college student takes 4 years to get on to their career. That career will not afford them the income level of what poor, unpaid Johnny will get a year earlier.


What cost of living? Here is how a scholarship is defined in the NCAA bylaws:

"A full grant-in-aid [scholarship] is financial aid that consists of tuition and fees, room and board, and required course-related books."

Fantastic. One I wish I could have received to attend my university. The only difference is that my school wasn't able to secure billion dollar media rights, sell jerseys with my number on them after going into the NCAA site and searching "Slappybrown" -- BUT HIS NAME ISN'T ON IT -- fill a 100K seat stadium with paid attendees, have the coach on the sideline making 5mm a year, or otherwise make most everyone else running the program and the program itself rich. So this whole "players on full rides get XYZ, so shut up and be happy about it" when its so laughably disproportionate to who generates the income versus who gets it is just poor reasoning. Comparing athletes at big D-1 schools playing football and basketball to the "average college student" is nonsense.

"That career will not afford them the income level of what poor, unpaid Johnny will get a year earlier."

So because Joe College Student can't make millions doing something, his peers can't either? What does this have to do with anything? Your argument boils down to "players on scholarship should eat **** because I say so and because maybe if they make it through their college career playing a violent game that generates billions of dollars for the NCAA, they can make a lot of money in the NFL."
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,456
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby cheesesteakwithegg on Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:53 am

I think D-1 athletes should have the opportunity to get paid a stipend, just like student researchers do. At CMU, for example, PhD students have their tuition paid for and receive a monthly living stipend for doing research. Some students have their tuition / stipend paid by CMU, some have it paid by research grants, and some are a combination of both. PhD students are doing research that is making their institution more valuable, which is the same concept as what student athletes are doing (especially football and basketball). The value that student athletes are bringing to the university is much more quantifiable in the short term as well compared to what a researcher is doing (i.e. who knows what sort of IP will come from their research, how will the university benefit from that IP, etc).

In my opinion, it should be left up to the schools if they want to pay their athletes a stipend. However, a school would have to pay all of their collegiate athletes one, and not just to athletes of specific sports (would be lawsuit city). I really think it's time to start paying these kids, because they are making big money for their schools, and it may help clean up some of the issues such as receiving early benefits from agents, signing autographs, selling drugs, etc. Honestly, it makes a whole lot of sense to do it, so it will probably never get done.
cheesesteakwithegg
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,487
Joined: Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:53 am

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby slappybrown on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:01 am

joopen wrote:
slappybrown wrote:
joopen wrote:I honestly want to know how hard it is to just enjoy being a rock star on campus while having no expenses and no worries about life while preparing for a multi-million dollar career. The NCAA makes a buck now but he will too when he is a PROFESSIONAL.

Why can't he sell his signature?

He's a professional now. He's not getting paid for it. That's the only difference. You've bought the NCAA's horse **** hook line and sinker if you think he's an "amateur."

What if he tears his ACL tomorrow?


I would guess he has surgery and plays football again. Oh, plus the surgery would be paid for too. If it was so bad he couldn't play again well then he should be thankful that he has the opportunity to continue his education and get his degree for free, or at a minimum for half price. Accidents and injuries happen to everyone in every walk of life. What if a medical student who can be a surgeon has his hand smashed tomorrow? Yea it sucks that there are risks (Lattimore) but the rewards obviously outweigh the risks.

He's not a professional now. There is no way in all that is holy that a 18 19 or 20 year old would survive the NFL. It would be very few and far between who could. I don't care what the NCAA is feeding. I wasn't allowed to accept any money to help my high school run a camp for kids when I was a damn DIII football player. He can't because the rules allowing him to pursue his professional football career says he can't. In a year he can sell it as many times as he wants. He has to deal with it for A YEAR before being handsomely compensated before even performing at his job.


How incredibly magnanimous of the NCAA to pay for the surgery resulting from an injury their unpaid labor force suffered while generating literally billions of dollars for fat dudes in ill-fitting suits. What an organization. The NCAA could just put those broken down "student-athletes" down when they tear ligaments or break bones to save costs against those billion dollar TV contracts, but instead they actually pay for the surgery.

I don't understand your larger point here. My point is that the rules are arcane remnants of an era when "student-athlete" wasn't laughable on its face. If you are argument is that accepting money is a violation of NCAA at present, then yes, of course it is.

The rules are moronic. Why should the NCAA control who wants to buy HIS OWN SIGNATURE?!?! What is the possible justification for that, other than an attempt to keep the floodgates of paid players from prying open as long as possible?

No one paid you at your DIII football camp because, quite frankly, no one gave a **** about your DIII football camp in the larger scheme of things. No one wanted your signature or to bask in the reflected glory of your DIII football career, unlike major college football players. But yes, if you were running the camp at the behest of whatever school you went to to help them in recruiting, you sure as **** should have been paid but for NCAA idiocy.

You've seized on this professional/amateur distinction like it means anything. Its completely invented by the NCAA to justify their existence and to avoid paying athletes -- this sums it up:

In its predicament, the NCAA has no recourse to any principle or law that can justify amateurism. There is no such thing. Scholars and sportswriters yearn for grand juries to ferret out every forbidden bauble that reaches a college athlete, but the NCAA's ersatz courts can only masquerade as public authority. How could any statute impose amateur status on college athletes, or on anyone else? No legal definition of amateur exists, and any attempt to create one in enforceable law would expose its repulsive and unconstitutional nature—a bill of attainder, stripping from college athletes the rights of American citizenship.


Its completely and utterly made up, and you've bought their bull ****.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... ts/308643/

That they were students meant they did not have to be compensated, ever, for anything more than the cost of their studies. Student-athlete became the NCAA's signature term, repeated constantly in and out of courtrooms...as both a legalistic defense and a noble ideal. Indeed, such is the term's rhetorical power that it is increasingly used as a sort of reflexive mantra against charges of rabid hypocrisy.


The moral logic is hard to fathom: the NCAA bans personal messages on the bodies of the players, and penalizes players for trading their celebrity status for discounted tattoos, but it codifies precisely how and where commercial insignia from multinational corporations can be displayed on college players, for the financial benefit of the colleges. Last season, while the NCAA investigated him and his father for the recruiting fees they'd allegedly sought, Cam Newton compliantly wore at least 15 corporate logos—one on his jersey, four on his helmet visor, one on each wristband, one on his pants, six on his shoes, and one on the headband he wears under his helmet—as part of Auburn's $10.6 million deal with Under Armour.
Last edited by slappybrown on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
slappybrown
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 17,456
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 11:08 am
Location: Noted Board Henchman

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rylan on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:03 am

cheesesteakwithegg wrote:I think D-1 athletes should have the opportunity to get paid a stipend, just like student researchers do. At CMU, for example, PhD students have their tuition paid for and receive a monthly living stipend for doing research. Some students have their tuition / stipend paid by CMU, some have it paid by research grants, and some are a combination of both. PhD students are doing research that is making their institution more valuable, which is the same concept as what student athletes are doing (especially football and basketball). The value that student athletes are bringing to the university is much more quantifiable in the short term as well compared to what a researcher is doing (i.e. who knows what sort of IP will come from their research, how will the university benefit from that IP, etc).

In my opinion, it should be left up to the schools if they want to pay their athletes a stipend. However, a school would have to pay all of their collegiate athletes one, and not just to athletes of specific sports (would be lawsuit city). I really think it's time to start paying these kids, because they are making big money for their schools, and it may help clean up some of the issues such as receiving early benefits from agents, signing autographs, selling drugs, etc. Honestly, it makes a whole lot of sense to do it, so it will probably never get done.


The issue with paying all athletes is that only a small amount of schools would come close to making enough to cover all student athletes. Just allow the athletes to make money using their name to generate revenue for themselves. Its the only rule that is ridiculous. For the vast majority of student athletes, the scholarship is valuable enough. However, for others they are worth much much more than just the scholarship (Manziel in this instance) and he should be allowed to generate money for himself through whatever legal means necessary.
Rylan
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,995
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:07 am
Location: Dead and Without Love

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby columbia on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:04 am

I wonder how much of one's opinion on this is influenced by what college you went to?

D-IIIers like me tend to perplexed by a university raking in all of that cash on the backs of athletes.
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 45,852
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby pfim on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:32 am

columbia wrote:I wonder how much of one's opinion on this is influenced by what college you went to?

D-IIIers like me tend to perplexed by a university raking in all of that cash on the backs of athletes.


I went to Pitt, still don't get it. The only reasonable argument is that the higher revenue sports subsidize the lower revenue sports. But that begs the question of why a university actually exists (to educate?).
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby Rylan on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:36 am

pfim wrote:
columbia wrote:I wonder how much of one's opinion on this is influenced by what college you went to?

D-IIIers like me tend to perplexed by a university raking in all of that cash on the backs of athletes.


I went to Pitt, still don't get it. The only reasonable argument is that the higher revenue sports subsidize the lower revenue sports. But that begs the question of why a university actually exists (to educate?).


Athletics are still educational. Just because they are sports does not make them any less important to those "majoring" in them.
Rylan
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 15,995
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:07 am
Location: Dead and Without Love

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby columbia on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:41 am

pfim wrote:
columbia wrote:I wonder how much of one's opinion on this is influenced by what college you went to?

D-IIIers like me tend to perplexed by a university raking in all of that cash on the backs of athletes.


I went to Pitt, still don't get it. The only reasonable argument is that the higher revenue sports subsidize the lower revenue sports. But that begs the question of why a university actually exists (to educate?).


Sure, but D-III schools pay for all of the programs out of the general operating budget (and perhaps dedicated endowments).
If a college/university - at any level - values having a swim team, they will set aside money for it.
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 45,852
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am

Re: 2013 LGP College Football Thread

Postby pfim on Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:54 am

Rylan wrote:
pfim wrote:
columbia wrote:I wonder how much of one's opinion on this is influenced by what college you went to?

D-IIIers like me tend to perplexed by a university raking in all of that cash on the backs of athletes.


I went to Pitt, still don't get it. The only reasonable argument is that the higher revenue sports subsidize the lower revenue sports. But that begs the question of why a university actually exists (to educate?).


Athletics are still educational. Just because they are sports does not make them any less important to those "majoring" in them.


So you're saying they're going to college to become professional athletes? There are (or should be) much better avenues to develop professional athletes. No one should be majoring in playing football. Sure that happens, but that's just a product of a broken system.
pfim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,789
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:35 am
Location: Sitting in front of my computer

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Eismann, MalkinIsMyHomeboy, PghSkins, skullman80, the riddler and 7 guests

e-mail