The NCAA sucks

[BigRedLedbetter]

Good to have Adam on our side.

And suspend guys two games for beating their wife and four for smoking a blunt.

Those in glass houses, Adam.

Gotta love dem double standards.

[Green Habit]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

[BigRedLedbetter]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

Sure. Probably not a bad idea. I wonder what that would do for scholly limits and whatnot. Like lets say a QB takes on an endorsement from Nike and he is a Sophomore. The next year when he is a Junior obviously he isn't on scholly anymore so is that schooly available for a new recruit? The 80 scholly limit really balances out the playing field so those schollys are a big deal.

[Green Habit]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

Sure. Probably not a bad idea. I wonder what that would do for scholly limits and whatnot. Like lets say a QB takes on an endorsement from Nike and he is a Sophomore. The next year when he is a Junior obviously he isn't on scholly anymore so is that schooly available for a new recruit? The 80 scholly limit really balances out the playing field so those schollys are a big deal.

Just adjust the rules to make it a roster limit instead of a scholarship limit. Reducing football scholarships awarded might also relieve the Title IX concerns in that regard as well.

[Peeps]

i would say a flat rate of $250 per week for all d1 athletes who are restricted from being employed

[BigRedLedbetter]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

Sure. Probably not a bad idea. I wonder what that would do for scholly limits and whatnot. Like lets say a QB takes on an endorsement from Nike and he is a Sophomore. The next year when he is a Junior obviously he isn't on scholly anymore so is that schooly available for a new recruit? The 80 scholly limit really balances out the playing field so those schollys are a big deal.

Just adjust the rules to make it a roster limit instead of a scholarship limit. Reducing football scholarships awarded might also relieve the Title IX concerns in that regard as well.

Don't get me started on Title IX.

Your idea sounds good.

[elliseamos]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

Sure. Probably not a bad idea. I wonder what that would do for scholly limits and whatnot. Like lets say a QB takes on an endorsement from Nike and he is a Sophomore. The next year when he is a Junior obviously he isn't on scholly anymore so is that schooly available for a new recruit? The 80 scholly limit really balances out the playing field so those schollys are a big deal.

Just adjust the rules to make it a roster limit instead of a scholarship limit. Reducing football scholarships awarded might also relieve the Title IX concerns in that regard as well.

Don't get me started on Title IX.

Your idea sounds good.

but couldn't this 'theoretically' cause a major conflict of interest issue if, say T. Boone Pickens, decides to be a sponsor for kids at OSU and OK? Not to mention Oregon and every other school in the country? I like the idea of roster limits.

[elliseamos]

hmmm...

In the complex exchange represented by a recruit’s decision to attend and play for a particular school, the school provides tuition, room and board, fees, and book expenses, often at little or no cost to the school. The recruit provides his athletic performance and the use of his name, image, and likeness. However, the schools agree to value the latter at zero by agreeing not to compete with each other to credit any other value to the recruit in the exchange. This is an anticompetitive effect. Thus, the Court finds that the NCAA has the power -- and exercises that power -- to fix prices and restrain competition in the college education market that Plaintiffs have identified.

This price-fixing agreement constitutes a restraint of trade. The evidence presented at trial makes clear that, in the absence of this agreement, certain schools would compete for recruits by offering them a lower price for the opportunity to play FBS football or Division I basketball while they attend college. Indeed, the NCAA’s own expert, Dr. Rubinfeld, acknowledged that the NCAA operates as a cartel that imposes a restraint on trade in this market.

[BigRedLedbetter]

Do you view an athletic scholarship as payment to play? I do.

As do I. For football and basketball anyway. Rarely do you see other sports having someone on a full ride scholly. I know in baseball (D1 anyway) you get 11.7 schollys top give out for the full team. Which is like 35 guys or so. D2 it's less. I wanna say 9 full schollys for the full team.

What do you two think of the compromise that I'm increasingly coming heavily in favor of: athletes can choose to take on endorsements, but if they do, they forfeit their scholarship and have to pay for it and/or go into debt like everyone else.

Sure. Probably not a bad idea. I wonder what that would do for scholly limits and whatnot. Like lets say a QB takes on an endorsement from Nike and he is a Sophomore. The next year when he is a Junior obviously he isn't on scholly anymore so is that schooly available for a new recruit? The 80 scholly limit really balances out the playing field so those schollys are a big deal.

Just adjust the rules to make it a roster limit instead of a scholarship limit. Reducing football scholarships awarded might also relieve the Title IX concerns in that regard as well.

Don't get me started on Title IX.

Your idea sounds good.

but couldn't this 'theoretically' cause a major conflict of interest issue if, say T. Boone Pickens, decides to be a sponsor for kids at OSU and OK? Not to mention Oregon and every other school in the country? I like the idea of roster limits.

Really good point too.

[Green Habit]

but couldn't this 'theoretically' cause a major conflict of interest issue if, say T. Boone Pickens, decides to be a sponsor for kids at OSU and OK? Not to mention Oregon and every other school in the country? I like the idea of roster limits.

If this becomes a problem, just make boosters like T. Boone make a choice as well. Either you sponsor the student or you sponsor the school, but not both.

[elliseamos]

but couldn't this 'theoretically' cause a major conflict of interest issue if, say T. Boone Pickens, decides to be a sponsor for kids at OSU and OK? Not to mention Oregon and every other school in the country? I like the idea of roster limits.

If this becomes a problem, just make boosters like T. Boone make a choice as well. Either you sponsor the student or you sponsor the school, but not both.

but it's the corporation sponsoring the student and individual-alumni sponsoring the school, surely you of all people know the difference?

[Fuck You Jobu]

hmmm...

In the complex exchange represented by a recruit’s decision to attend and play for a particular school, the school provides tuition, room and board, fees, and book expenses, often at little or no cost to the school. The recruit provides his athletic performance and the use of his name, image, and likeness. However, the schools agree to value the latter at zero by agreeing not to compete with each other to credit any other value to the recruit in the exchange. This is an anticompetitive effect. Thus, the Court finds that the NCAA has the power -- and exercises that power -- to fix prices and restrain competition in the college education market that Plaintiffs have identified.

This price-fixing agreement constitutes a restraint of trade. The evidence presented at trial makes clear that, in the absence of this agreement, certain schools would compete for recruits by offering them a lower price for the opportunity to play FBS football or Division I basketball while they attend college. Indeed, the NCAA’s own expert, Dr. Rubinfeld, acknowledged that the NCAA operates as a cartel that imposes a restraint on trade in this market.

[Green Habit]

Sounds like Electromatic could be participating in this thread soon...

[Electromatic]

Meh, Georgia needs to sack up on this one.

Play Gurley, the season is over without him anyway and it's not like there isn't a precedent with Cam Newton, Manziel a and Winston.

Let the NCAA prove something first.

If you have to forfeit so be it, let us watch the best player in college football do his thing.

Or just fold up the football program altogether or merge with Clemson.

[Electromatic]

Furthermore, the level of lunacy be it USC or Ohio State or Georgia.

My God these "student-athletes" are selling things that belong to them for cash...it's horrifying...

Mark Emmert should get a fire poker enema for every dollar he made last year.

[Bammer]

FREE TODD GURLEY

[Green Habit]

So now it sounds that Winston is in the same autograph ring as Gurley. Just watch that the NCAA drops the hammer on him now instead of the sexual assault he's been alleged of doing...

[Green Habit]

FREE TODD GURLEY

http://www.sbnation.com/college-footbal ... ree-gurl3y

In another stark reminder of whom the NCAA's inane rules governing athletes' self-promotion actually serve (everyone but the athletes), an entrepreneurially-minded Georgia student has reportedly been making a profit off of running back Todd Gurley's name, per the Atlanta-Journal Constitution. Gurley is currently suspended for allegedly doing the same.

Bennett, a senior business major, has been selling shirts that say #FreeGurl3y, telling the AJC he has sold about 100 in three days at $15 per shirt.

Bennett said by selling the shirts, he is ""pointing out a huge flaw in the system that the NCAA has." Gurley was reportedly spotted wearing a Free Gurley shirt in Athens, but Bennett said the shirt wasn't his.

[Electromatic]

"Since January, NCAA Division I membership gave staff more flexibility to consider unique circumstances when determining eligibility," according to the statement, published by USA Today. "The NCAA staff's decision was made within this process and based on a combination of considerations. This waiver narrowly extends the rules—which allow Davis to accept the payment and still be eligible in any other sport—to include baseball. The NCAA staff also considered the historically limited opportunities for women to participate in professional baseball. In addition, Davis is much younger than when the vast majority of the prospect rules apply. While this situation is unusual, the flexible approach utilized in this decision is not."


Do you think they have the ability to reason at all or are they just too dense to see that amateurism at the highest levels of any sport at virtually any age is dead?


It's hard for girls to compete with boys in sports, so making money off of her name and likeness is ok with us... because she has a vagina and she pitches baseballs really fast. (Also our policies regarding humans profiting off of their own names and likeness are ridiculous and the public is starting to see that now)

College basketball coaches should get the phile suffix added to their recruiting practices.

[Green Habit]

I wasn't sure what that's about, so here's a link to an article:

http://www.cbssports.com/general/eye-on ... commercial

Do you think they have the ability to reason at all or are they just too dense to see that amateurism at the highest levels of any sport at virtually any age is dead?

It isn't completely illogical for the schools and the NCAA to be so draconian--after all, they are getting free labor. If they crack the door open a bit they risk having the whole thing swing open. That's probably why they're so strict against agents--they'd given them all kinds of info to organize. Eventually, though, it will be impossible to stop.