The Shame of College Sports

[danwismar]

Frank Deford calls Taylor Branch's Atlantic Monthly piece released today, "the most important article ever written about college sports". Therefore I guess we should all read it...long as it is... (I'm no big Deford fan, but this is a great read...and you might as well read it, because everybody is going to be talking about it)

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... orts/8643/

This little excerpt gets to the heart of the matter in "The Shame of College Sports". At bottom, it is an indictment of the NCAA as currently comprised....


The list of scandals goes on. With each revelation, there is much wringing of hands. Critics scold schools for breaking faith with their educational mission, and for failing to enforce the sanctity of “amateurism.” Sportswriters denounce the NCAA for both tyranny and impotence in its quest to “clean up” college sports. Observers on all sides express jumbled emotions about youth and innocence, venting against professional mores or greedy amateurs.

For all the outrage, the real scandal is not that students are getting illegally paid or recruited, it’s that two of the noble principles on which the NCAA justifies its existence—“amateurism” and the “student-athlete”—are cynical hoaxes, legalistic confections propagated by the universities so they can exploit the skills and fame of young athletes. The tragedy at the heart of college sports is not that some college athletes are getting paid, but that more of them are not.

[Spin]

Where the fuck has this guy been? 20some years ago, Orrville High School's starting QB's father suddenly got a job with the Massillon school board and they had to move there. Fuckin public high schools have been recruiting and buying players for decades, and this dumbass thinks the NCAA is suddenly corrupt???

[Triple-S]

Where the fuck has this guy been? 20some years ago, Orrville High School's starting QB's father suddenly got a job with the Massillon school board and they had to move there. Fuckin public high schools have been recruiting and buying players for decades, and this dumbass thinks the NCAA is suddenly corrupt???

or how perry is able to get kids from Russia, Texas and kids from my school district to wrestle for them?

BTW, Ohio needs a two-tier system. Public division and Private. St. Ed's and Iggy shouldn't be in the same division as a school like NC Hoover or Solon who don't have the ability to "Recruit" so to speak.

[Spin]

Wasn't there a movie in the 80's about a high school basketball player being recruited by colleges, and his old man getting a new tractor?

SSS I agree they should be in a different classification, but not because they're the only high schools who recruit. I think they should be because they're often put in divisions they have no business in, talent wise.

The one year my D4 high school made the playoffs, we had to play Cardinal Mooney in the first round. We got blown off the field. The following season, Mooney was moved up TWO DIVISIONS. Gee thanx OHSAA for backhandedly admitting what we already knew...

[Triple-S]

This past spring, the Justice Department questioned the BCS about its adherence to antitrust standards. Jim Delany, the commissioner of the Big Ten, has estimated that a national playoff system could produce three or four times as much money as the existing bowl system does. If a significant band of football schools were to demonstrate that they could orchestrate a true national playoff, without the NCAA’s assistance, the association would be terrified—and with good reason. Because if the big sports colleges don’t need the NCAA to administer a national playoff in football, then they don’t need it to do so in basketball. In which case, they could cut out the middleman in March Madness and run the tournament themselves. Which would deprive the NCAA of close to $1 billion a year, more than 95 percent of its revenue. The organization would be reduced to a rule book without money—an organization aspiring to enforce its rules but without the financial authority to enforce anything.

so pretty much from the sound of it, B1G, PAC, SEC and the new ACC/Big East hybrid could go. "The hell with this", leave, form their own NCAA, and then change things up so that we actually have a playoff?

my only concern is little ol' kent state and akron could be left out in the cold and could just become FCS schools.

[Spin]

my only concern is little ol' kent state and akron could be left out in the cold and could just become FCS schools.

Have you seen either team play this year?????

[Triple-S]

my only concern is little ol' kent state and akron could be left out in the cold and could just become FCS schools.

Have you seen either team play this year?????

Were not "Akron" bad man, attendance is still decent too.

[Spin]

With four superconferences it would be quite easy to have a two week playoff (although the Big12 might be throwing a wrench into that plan by surviving).

[Spin]

my only concern is little ol' kent state and akron could be left out in the cold and could just become FCS schools.

Have you seen either team play this year?????

Were not "Akron" bad man, attendance is still decent too.

Oh I'm sorry, I thought you were 0-2. Silly me...

[furls]

Wow, I feel dirty for loving college sports. It is getting harder and harder to like them when you read stuff like this.

There is a point that he kind of glazed over.... the NCAA cries Student-athlete and screams education as its mission, yet it only offers one year scholarships to the players (renewable). If the real mission was to educate, then they would offer the scholarship until the completion of the education.

The entire system is gross. Just gross. Like I said, let the players make their own money from wherever they like. University doesn't have to pay them. Hell, they could say that only amateur players get scholarships, everyone else can earn and the players have to pick.

I don't know, I just think it is ridiculous.

[gdbenz]

Furls, Branch didn't skim over the one-year renewable scholarship offers but instead uses them to further make his case that these are used in the same ways pro teams use the ability to cut players. He makes a compelling case, so compelling in fact that I'm not a firm believer. The NCAA needs to go and the entire system junked in favor of dealing with the realities of it all.

[furls]

I read that Gary, and I agree with his point, that they are used as a way to make cuts. OSU generally doesn't do it very often, the only examples I can think of off the top of my head are James Jackson and Nick DeLilo. It is absolutely rampant in the SEC.

What I was trying to say in my earlier post is that this system of using one year scholarships as a way to execute cuts directly flies in the face of the NCAA's stated mission to "student-athletes." I am not sure what James Jackson's GPA was, and I am sure that it did not matter, what mattered was the fact that he was NEVER going to see the field at tOSU and the staff knew it.

Word on the street at the time was that Jackson was very averse to the contact at the college level. If you have ever been anywhere near those collisions, I am not sure that anyone in their right mind wouldn't be.

[gdbenz]

I agree, Furls. The NCAA uses the educational aspect of its mission as a complete cover for their capitalistic motives, which predominate. I don't begrudge someone making money. My problem is that they aren't honest about their motives or the way they go about doing things.

[Triple-S]

I'm loving this idea that was posted on deadspin:

University of New Haven business professor Allen Sack, a former Notre Dame football player, believes there's a way for students to be compensated without forcing schools to pay them. He said NCAA athletes should take a page from the Olympic model of amateurism. They should be allowed to take control of their own marketing rights: to hire agents, sign endorsement deals and engage in other "entrepreneurial" activities. "Anybody who can write a business plan is able to make money from big-time college sports-except the athletes themselves," he said.

Unlike a system that offers stipends or pays athletes directly, this wouldn't cost the NCAA or any of its member institutions a nickel. The financial burden would land with the shoe companies, multinational corporations and local car dealerships who want to enlist the athletes to help them push products. Drexel sports-management professor Ellen Staurowsky said this sort of arrangement might help protect schools from the "underground economy" that gives star athletes benefits under the table.

One common criticism of adopting the Olympic model is that it might allow boosters to lavish millions on athletes on their favorite teams under the guise of sponsorship. For example, rather than supporting the Oregon athletic department, Nike founder Phil Knight could simply pay Oregon's players to wear Nike gear.

http://deadspin.com/5841051/the-idea-of ... its-moment

[furls]

One common criticism of adopting the Olympic model is that it might allow boosters to lavish millions on athletes on their favorite teams under the guise of sponsorship. For example, rather than supporting the Oregon athletic department, Nike founder Phil Knight could simply pay Oregon's players to wear Nike gear.

Is that really such a bad thing? I am no Oregon fan, and this is clearly a built in advantage for some schools(one that could crush some programs), but so what?

[pup]

One common criticism of adopting the Olympic model is that it might allow boosters to lavish millions on athletes on their favorite teams under the guise of sponsorship. For example, rather than supporting the Oregon athletic department, Nike founder Phil Knight could simply pay Oregon's players to wear Nike gear.

Is that really such a bad thing? I am no Oregon fan, and this is clearly a built in advantage for some schools(one that could crush some programs), but so what?

So you like the MLB plan?

[motherscratcher]

One common criticism of adopting the Olympic model is that it might allow boosters to lavish millions on athletes on their favorite teams under the guise of sponsorship. For example, rather than supporting the Oregon athletic department, Nike founder Phil Knight could simply pay Oregon's players to wear Nike gear.

Is that really such a bad thing? I am no Oregon fan, and this is clearly a built in advantage for some schools(one that could crush some programs), but so what?

So you like the MLB plan?

Well, in the MLB plan tOSU might be the Yankees or the Red Sox so...yeah.

[furls]

One common criticism of adopting the Olympic model is that it might allow boosters to lavish millions on athletes on their favorite teams under the guise of sponsorship. For example, rather than supporting the Oregon athletic department, Nike founder Phil Knight could simply pay Oregon's players to wear Nike gear.

Is that really such a bad thing? I am no Oregon fan, and this is clearly a built in advantage for some schools(one that could crush some programs), but so what?

So you like the MLB plan?

Not really, but artificially depressing player wages so that I can get the competitive balance that I want every week while everyone profits off these players but the players themselves doesn't really seem better.

NCAAF right now is as good as it will ever be. It is an amazing product and allowing players to be paid is probably not going to make it better, actually it will probably hurt the balance of the game, but right is right.

[motherscratcher]

Not really, but artificially depressing player wages so that I can get the competitive balance that I want every week while everyone profits off these players but the players themselves doesn't really seem better.

NCAAF right now is as good as it will ever be. It is an amazing product and allowing players to be paid is probably not going to make it better, actually it will probably hurt the balance of the game, but right is right.

How 'bout this. We allow players to be paid or to earn money and all that. But to keep the competitive balance everyone just promises not to hoard the good players or pay a lot more than everyone else so everyone has a chance? You know, like a gentlemen's agreement.

That'd work, right?

[furls]

hahahaha

[e0y2e3]

Let's be honest, the reason the NCAA is great is because it is the anti-NFL. It is 1990s football.

And it is perfect for it.

Fuck competitive balance. If a small market/program lile Boise Steps up good for them. They can compete. Fuck the rest of em.

[furls]

Nailed it e0. I love the game because the players make mistakes, lots of them. Their lack of experience and coaching makes crazy ass systems work that don't work in the pros. I love the wild formations and trickeration. I love the 60-90 yd TDs and pick 6's.

I love seeing a spread team play a smashmouth, wishbone/triple option team. It is just more interesting to me.

[pup]

So your only problem with the college game is the rules?

Shit. My only problem with life is laws.

But they are there. And you have to abide by them. If you don't want to, move to another country. In this case, sit back, pay for your own school and you can take whatever pay you damn well please from whoever will give it to you.

Shit ain't that hard my man. If someone offers you cash you have two choices. 1) say no 2) accept the consequences of saying yes

[mattvan1]

So your only problem with the college game is the rules?

Shit. My only problem with life is laws.

But they are there. And you have to abide by them. If you don't want to, move to another country. In this case, sit back, pay for your own school and you can take whatever pay you damn well please from whoever will give it to you.

Shit ain't that hard my man. If someone offers you cash you have two choices. 1) say no 2) accept the consequences of saying yes

What if the rules, like many laws, are so outdated they need to be changed? What if the governing body is so inefficient, ineffective and disingenuous that it should be abolished? What if the "reforms" would yield the most improvement to inter collegiate sports if they were to be applied to the administrators and not the athletes?

The NCAA has far outlived its intended purpose. It needs to adapt or die.

[FUDU]

[Triple-S]

So your only problem with the college game is the rules?

Problems with cfb from a strict B1G homer:

-The SEC's domination due in part to a mixture of things ranging from population shift, over recruiting, and one year scholarships. Their lack of academic standards compared to those in B1G, PAC, etc.

-The BCS and the post-season being perhaps the most anti-climatic in all of sports. Seriously. I'm tired of watching the SEC smack around B1G/PAC/Big 12 school and doing so while flat out honestly buying a Nat'l title in most cases. I imagine this is what the Super Bowl was like prior to the 99 Rams/Titans game.

-Unsportsmanlike conduct penalties like this: (seriously, it's an emotional GAME, this ain't chess or checkers, if something like this happens, let the kid go)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtLNmhRA2Hc&feature=related[/youtube]

-Schools like Kent pretty much given 2nd class citizenship compared to the TOSUs and 'bamas of the world. "Yes, you can compete in our division but have no shot at playing for our Nat'l title." I'm not even saying that they shouldn't earn the same money, but christ, give Cinderella a chance if they've so earned it.

-ESPN. just. period. They've tried to take everything I could possibly love about the sport and tried to a take giant shit on it. Between it's consistent grudge against the B1G and TOSU, allowing someone like Mark May as a supposed legit analyst/journalist on the network, and playing the worst music possible on College Gameday (were art thou bubba sparxxx?) to the Saturday night game itself. I havn't even scratched the surface with other garbage such as the Mike Leach/Craig James fiasco.

[furls]

So your only problem with the college game is the rules?

Shit. My only problem with life is laws.

But they are there. And you have to abide by them. If you don't want to, move to another country. In this case, sit back, pay for your own school and you can take whatever pay you damn well please from whoever will give it to you.

Shit ain't that hard my man. If someone offers you cash you have two choices. 1) say no 2) accept the consequences of saying yes

The rules are fucking stupid, but the rules are the rules and if they break them and get caught then they should face the consequences. What you insinuate in the bold part is that there are options. I would tell you that there are not. How else do you get to the NFL? Name the last guy to play in the NFL that did not attend any college?

I don't know why you have it against these guys earning money, what is wrong with it in principle? Why does it matter to you? Are you going to cut checks to a tailback who destroys his ACL playing for free to make up for the lost income that he would have gotten in the NFL? Once he gets cut by his team because he just isn't good enough, what is left? What if he could have made 250K during that same time period while in school, would you begrudge that?

What I find is that most people like you have no real reason to support the current system other than they like the product on the field and they would have "loved the chance to go to college for free," or sometimes you get the old, "They are already treated like royalty on campus." Treated like royalty on campus ain't good for shit when your knees don't work anymore.

The NCAA is selective enforcement at best now.

[Spin]

The rules are fucking stupid, but the rules are the rules and if they break them and get caught then they should face the consequences. What you insinuate in the bold part is that there are options. I would tell you that there are not. How else do you get to the NFL? Name the last guy to play in the NFL that did not attend any college?

I don't know why you have it against these guys earning money, what is wrong with it in principle? Why does it matter to you? Are you going to cut checks to a tailback who destroys his ACL playing for free to make up for the lost income that he would have gotten in the NFL? Once he gets cut by his team because he just isn't good enough, what is left? What if he could have made 250K during that same time period while in school, would you begrudge that?

What I find is that most people like you have no real reason to support the current system other than they like the product on the field and they would have "loved the chance to go to college for free," or sometimes you get the old, "They are already treated like royalty on campus." Treated like royalty on campus ain't good for shit when your knees don't work anymore.

The NCAA is selective enforcement at best now.

So where do you draw the line? Should YOUR tax money go to paying the Akron Zips football players who let Cincy run up 52 first half points today???? It's a Division I-A public university.

Do you want YOUR tax money going to pay Toledo basketball players who went 1-15 in the MAC last year???

How about the Ohio State Women's Field Hockey team? Remember Title IX. Pay the men, pay the women!!!

And only NFL prospects get their knees blown out???

Talk about double standards...

Myself? I really don't feel like my tax money going to Bauserman or Miller is what this state needs right now.

[furls]

Read my fucking post before you comment. Where the fuck did I say the state or the school should pay?

No I want the fucking Boosters, who can't wait to give these guys $$$ to do it. I want Nike to do it. I want Reebok to do it. I want Adidas to do it. I want your kids to do it when they go the mall and pay Pryor (or someone) $5 for him to scribble on paper. The state shouldn't do it and the school shouldn't do it, they should just get the fuck out of the way.

[furls]

And yes I do have a double standard.....

Blown knees happen to lots of different types of athletes, but generally it only affects the future earning potential of BB players, FB players and Track Stars.

Hitting the whole world with a single "standard" is stupid, not all cases (and injuries) are the same for all people. Don't get me wrong, I am sure tearing an ACL sucks for a mens volleyball player, but he wasn't going to make a great living in men's volleyball anyways.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

I don't think Akron football players should get paid because they're not very good.

If you want to pay the soccer team, go ahead.

[Spin]

I don't think Akron football players should get paid because they're not very good.

If you want to pay the soccer team, go ahead.

I want to pay the hockey players. They pay their own tuition, pay to play, and put on a hell of a lot better show than anyone else.

[furls]

If someone wants to give the Hockey or Soccer players $$$ I am all for it. Let the players maximize their earning potential.

If an MBA student figures out a way to make some serious $$$ while on scholarship at Stanford is he allowed to enjoy the benefit of his entrepeneurship? ABSOLUTELY. The NCAA is only there to protect profit margins and ensure the players don't tap into the member institutions piece of the pie. Hence the great farce of amateurism and the "student-athlete."

[pup]

I may respond in more detail later on, but the simple version is this

1. I am not in favor of changing rules simply because poeple are unable to follow them.

2. I am not in favor of changing rules that make it impossible for 98% of a sport to compete. At any level. This will be going back to unlimited scholarship days. If you don't think a booster will be paying a kid to ride the pine at tOSU instead of going to Toledo, you are nuts.

[Spin]

If someone wants to give the Hockey or Soccer players $$$ I am all for it. Let the players maximize their earning potential.

If an MBA student figures out a way to make some serious $$$ while on scholarship at Stanford is he allowed to enjoy the benefit of his entrepeneurship? ABSOLUTELY. The NCAA is only there to protect profit margins and ensure the players don't tap into the member institutions piece of the pie. Hence the great farce of amateurism and the "student-athlete."

I'm starting to see your POV.

The rules are unenforceable. Impossible to follow 4000 kids 24/7. And when a violation comes about from an outside source, it just makes the NCAA look worse.

Then you have the coaches, with alumni, backers, fans, and hundreds of school staff breathing down your neck to win and they don't care how. And the only way to do that in big time college football is to "do as the Romans do".

There's just no way to enforce the rules, unless someone gets pissed off, like in Miami's case, and starts a shit storm.

[Madre Hill, Superstar]

The NCAA is only there to protect profit margins and ensure the players don't tap into the member institutions piece of the pie. Hence the great farce of amateurism and the "student-athlete."

On one hand, you're absolutely right.

On the other, what are you willing to give up to remove the 'student-athlete' fig leaf? Forget competitive balance, all that's mashuguana once you've reduced the bowl season and NCAA tournament to the College World Series level.

[mattvan1]

The NCAA is only there to protect profit margins and ensure the players don't tap into the member institutions piece of the pie. Hence the great farce of amateurism and the "student-athlete."

On one hand, you're absolutely right.

On the other, what are you willing to give up to remove the 'student-athlete' fig leaf? Forget competitive balance, all that's mashuguana once you've reduced the bowl season and NCAA tournament to the College World Series level.

Respectfully disagree. The "Bowl Season" (yawning through 80% of the games) and March Madness manage to succeed despite the NCAA, not because of it.

[furls]

I may respond in more detail later on, but the simple version is this

1. I am not in favor of changing rules simply because poeple are unable to follow them.

2. I am not in favor of changing rules that make it impossible for 98% of a sport to compete. At any level. This will be going back to unlimited scholarship days. If you don't think a booster will be paying a kid to ride the pine at tOSU instead of going to Toledo, you are nuts.

Don't care, if the kid wants to take $$ to sit on a bench rather than chase his NFL dreams, I don't care. Not my place.

I really don't care if allowing paying players renders the game such that only 'Bama and a couple of other schools can compete year in and year out. I don't. Having stupid rules that are not actually enforcable for the sake of having them is dumb. The current system only rewards those that cheat and don't self report (unless Yahoo! comes a knocking).

So while I know that you like your college sports parity, I am not sure the cost to the players is adequate. Don't tell me that there is no cost or that they should just go elsewhere or pay their own way. We all know that if you aspire to play in the NFL/NBA you only have one option. Top players are losing hundreds of K (millions in some cases) in potential income every year, so you can have your parity.

The fact that you and I both know that letting boosters pay players, and letting players get endorsement $$ will fundamentally shift college football just underscores how undercompensated the players are. We may value the education, but they don't. They are being paid in beans when they really want corn. So while you and I would be grateful to get an education without cost, for many of these players they could care less about the education; further underscoring the joke that is the student-athlete.

Let's face it, if these athletes truly valued the education Northwestern, Vandy and Standford would recruit a lot better than they do and the SEC would be devoid of talent except for Vandy and maybe FL.

The system is a joke, but I guess it is great for you because you get the parity you want, so as long as you are getting the benefit you want, who gives a shit about the workers right?

[furls]

See here is the point:

We all love our competitive balance, our parity, because it is a benefit that we receive for free. Just because a benefit is free to consumers does not mean that it is free overall. In this case the producers, the "student-athletes" are paying for the benefit by lost revenues. Do any of you know what Jadaveon Clowney could have made on the open market last year in a booster bidding war? He is the best DL prospect in decades, and he probably could have gotten a Mill in guaranteed income. That is a lot for one guy to pay for "parity."

What does his "professionalism" cost you? Everyone has pretty much nailed it, parity. If it makes the sport less competitive and therefore less interesting to consumers, Clowney's price goes down and he becomes more available to other markets. There are so many top tier athletes that it would be hard for a single (or small cadre of schools) to corner the market. It is time to bring this stuff out of the shadows. Regulation for the sake of competitive balance only guarantees the existence of black markets. The same one's that the NCAA cannot enforce today.

Remember, your "competitive balance" is not free simply because you are not the one paying for it.

[pup]

Sherwin Williams sold ~$18B in paint last year.

They paid me a lot less than that. Should I start taking bribes from DuPont to fuck up formulas?

Me going 100 MPH doesn't cost anyone else a penny. Why should I go 55?

It is the way of the world Mike. They might as well get used to it at 18.

I feel no pity for Clowney. If he is as good as he is, he will get his millions for playing a game in a few years. Just like the doctor in med school will get his.

Should we start paying high school kids too?

Like I said earlier, anyone voting in favor of this system has no right to hate the Yankees. And if you were not a fan of tOSU, or even more likely if tOSU wasn't in the fire these days, there is no way you would be a proponent of such a thing. No freaking way.

[Spin]

Whether the gifts are legal or not, you're going to see the same teams at the top. The legacy schools with lots of rich faithful alumni, with a huge fan base (including the hangers-on (boosters)). Either way, it's the same.

There is no level playing field, and never will be. The only way that would work is with a high school draft. Otherwise, the same schools are going to be on top. Year in and year out.

[furls]

Sherwin Williams sold ~$18B in paint last year.

They paid me a lot less than that. Should I start taking bribes from DuPont to fuck up formulas?

Me going 100 MPH doesn't cost anyone else a penny. Why should I go 55?

It is the way of the world Mike. They might as well get used to it at 18.

I feel no pity for Clowney. If he is as good as he is, he will get his millions for playing a game in a few years. Just like the doctor in med school will get his.

Should we start paying high school kids too?

Like I said earlier, anyone voting in favor of this system has no right to hate the Yankees. And if you were not a fan of tOSU, or even more likely if tOSU wasn't in the fire these days, there is no way you would be a proponent of such a thing. No freaking way.

All of that was non sequitur bullshit and you know it.

-Sherwin Williams doesn't pay you enough, go to DuPont. No one is artificially depressing your wages. Sherwin Williams did not form a cartel with DuPont and create a system to maintain your wage lower.

-Driving 100MPH is illegal and dangerous. Accepting money from Boosters is not dangerous and is only illegal because they don't pay taxes on the income.

-As for Clowney, the promise of future wages does not excuse not paying him today. What if Sherwin Williams said, "Pup, you are C-Suite material. We are going to stop paying you for 4 years. Don't worry, you have a 2% chance (odds of getting drafted) of moving to the C-Suite and then you will be making it rain in strip clubs all around America." Would you sign up for that?

-If someone wants to pay HS kids for their autograph, I could care less. Should North High pay HS kids, no. Do I care if the North High Boosters by Big Timmy a fucking happy meal (or a steak)? I could care less. Good on Big Timmy. As a matter of fact, if Timmy has a good game and throws 4 TD passes and I buy him a Big Mac after the game it is no big deal. If I buy Braxton Miller a cheeseburger it is a secondary violation!

I have always thought that the NCAAs rules on amateurism are stupid. This has very little to nothing to do with tOSU. The Buckeyes are out of any real danger of serious sanctions, so that is obviously not why I hate the NCAA.

As for the hating the Yankees, sure I am jealous of the fact that they buy all my favorite players. It sucks, but it is a business and that is the structure of the business. The NCAA is not a business, or is it and it just pretends to not be a business for all the reasons outlined in the article that started this thread... if the NCAA admitted it was a for profit business (which we all know it is) then the schools would need to get Workman's Comp insurance to pay its employees on the field. Additionally, those same players would have real property rights and the NCAA could not claim that they are inherently without value and thus deny them revenues due. If the NCAA were a business, it would not survive anti-trust litigation for long (even still that day is coming).

The issue I have is that these people are hiring MBAs to come in and calculate ROICs for enormous stadium build programs, then in the next breath claiming that this is all about the students and their education, the same students who had better perform or they may not get renewed next year. So, it is OK for the school to dump James Jackson on his ass without recourse, but if he wants to transfer after his coach gets fired/quits he has to sit out a year???? This entire system is ridiculous. If I were an attorney, I would spend all of my pro bono time assailing the NCAA with lawsuits from former players and spewing up anti trust litigation. That is a no shitter. Matter of fact, the idea of law school has crossed my mind more than a few times.

[furls]

Whether the gifts are legal or not, you're going to see the same teams at the top. The legacy schools with lots of rich faithful alumni, with a huge fan base (including the hangers-on (boosters)). Either way, it's the same.

There is no level playing field, and never will be. The only way that would work is with a high school draft. Otherwise, the same schools are going to be on top. Year in and year out.

All facts. The system is already heavily slanted toward the big boys. Perhaps with pay to play guys like Lache Seastrunk would get a big offer from aTm and stay home and cut Willie Lyles and Oregon out of the equation. Perhaps, Lache Seastrunk would get a huge check from Phil Knight and stay at Oregon and bring his mama with him so she could watch the games. In the end, the guy that loses is Willie Lyles, and I am good with that.

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Accepting money from Boosters is not dangerous and is only illegal because they don't pay taxes on the income.

Fukin-aye! ^^^^^^^^ what's the big deal

Sincerely,

Al Capone

[Fire Marshall Bill]

If an MBA student figures out a way to make some serious $$$ while on scholarship at Stanford is he allowed to enjoy the benefit of his entrepeneurship?

How the hell do you bring up the comparison of a Stanford MBA student running his own business to a freshman football player getting a full ride???????????????

You're off your rocker and your zeal is part of the problem

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Sherwin Williams sold ~$18B in paint last year.

They paid me a lot less than that. Should I start taking bribes from DuPont to fuck up formulas?

Hey, I buy your paint exclusively for work. A little more lead please.

DuPont would never bribe you, go fuck yourself.

[pup]

Sherwin Williams sold ~$18B in paint last year.

They paid me a lot less than that. Should I start taking bribes from DuPont to fuck up formulas?

Hey, I buy your paint exclusively for work. A little more lead please.

Promise not to paint any little kids rooms with it. And never let anybody sand it later on, maybe we can work something out.

DuPont would never bribe you, go fuck yourself.