The NCAA sucks

[jwfocker]

Oh also, sucks that Clemson was in this bit. I don't agree with coach Dabo Swinney on this. As with most things, there has to be middle ground.

Hypocrisy aside, paying coaches lavishly is the most defensible of all of the things schools spend lavishly on. They'd be off to the NFL and NBA otherwise.

I don't know. I kind of disagree. I don't think it's defensible and I think it's a bloated market that has reached an absurd level. College coaches are paid way way too much in my mind. Hey good for them but its become absurd.

It's an odd setup. To say that they would be off to the NFL/NBA otherwise is a bit dismissive of the issue.

[Green Habit]

Oh also, sucks that Clemson was in this bit. I don't agree with coach Dabo Swinney on this. As with most things, there has to be middle ground.

Hypocrisy aside, paying coaches lavishly is the most defensible of all of the things schools spend lavishly on. They'd be off to the NFL and NBA otherwise.

I don't know. I kind of disagree. I don't think it's defensible and I think it's a bloated market that has reached an absurd level. College coaches are paid way way too much in my mind. Hey good for them but its become absurd.

It's an odd setup. To say that they would be off to the NFL/NBA otherwise is a bit dismissive of the issue.

How bloated is the market relative to the revenue generated, though? Someone ought to crunch the numbers and see if it's out of whack relative to professional sports. I'd expect it is to some extent...probably because they're not paying the players. But if you drive the coaching salaries down too far some of them are definitely going to chase the money at the pro levels--even if it's only as coordinators or assistant coaches. Yes, some won't be able to cut it and be forced to go back to the college level, but at least they'd have gotten a bigger paycheck for a few years.

[Electromatic]

Oh also, sucks that Clemson was in this bit. I don't agree with coach Dabo Swinney on this. As with most things, there has to be middle ground.

Hypocrisy aside, paying coaches lavishly is the most defensible of all of the things schools spend lavishly on. They'd be off to the NFL and NBA otherwise.

I don't know. I kind of disagree. I don't think it's defensible and I think it's a bloated market that has reached an absurd level. College coaches are paid way way too much in my mind. Hey good for them but its become absurd.

It's an odd setup. To say that they would be off to the NFL/NBA otherwise is a bit dismissive of the issue.

How bloated is the market relative to the revenue generated, though? Someone ought to crunch the numbers and see if it's out of whack relative to professional sports. I'd expect it is to some extent...probably because they're not paying the players. But if you drive the coaching salaries down too far some of them are definitely going to chase the money at the pro levels--even if it's only as coordinators or assistant coaches. Yes, some won't be able to cut it and be forced to go back to the college level, but at least they'd have gotten a bigger paycheck for a few years.

The entire process is a little absurd. That the states highest paid employee is a football coach, the second highest paid are coordinators... the college keeps throwing up buildings because they have to put football money somewhere....

Just change the system. It functions right now as the NFL's minor league system. What's your goal as an institution? If it's education end athletic scholarships and go to the D3 model. This will of course ruin college athletics as a whole because vastly smaller sums of people care about watching athletes that are in school to get an education. If you continue as is, provide the scholarship and pay the athlete for being the marketing ambassador that they are in revenue sports. In non revenue sports, be happy you are getting to go to college for free.

Basketball should go to the Baseball model. Why the hell don't they do this already?

http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/draftday/faq.jsp

That all said, the hypocrisy of the system makes people rich so I don't see anything changing for the betterment of the athlete/student.

[darth_vedder]

Regarding Coach Swinney, I thought that John Oliver segment was a bit off, and if memory serves correctly, that clip he used was around the time SC Lawmakers were considering paying players.

Swinney went on to say that he is for changes in the rules, and "enhanced" scholarships, but against flat out paying his players. Oliver, as he and Stewart often due, use clips to "prove" their point, but fail to explain the full context. So now the world thinks Dabo is some selfish taskmaster, and take what Oliver said at 100% face value, when the truth is, it's far more complex.

Here is what he went on to say, but I'm sure John Oliver will never, ever mention this:

“When I was in college, it was the same discussion. I am 1,000 percent in favor of a stipend or a scholarship enhancement, modernizing the scholarship is probably the better term,” he said, “Because it hasn’t changed, yet it costs more to go to a movie, it costs more to buy gas, it costs more to wash your clothes than it did when I was in school.”
He is not in favor of bringing a professional flavor to intercollegiate athletics.
“There needs to be an adjustment there, but as far as professionalizing college athletics - first of all, college athletics would go away. I’m 1,000 percent against that. We’ve got enough entitlement in this country as it is and it totally devalues an education. It just blows my mind. They don’t even want to quantify an education. I’m standing here because I got my education.
“I didn’t get into coaching to make money. Coaches weren’t making any money when I got into coaching. I got into coaching because it’s what I wanted to do in my life and because it’s what I was passionate about, but I was able to do it because I had my education. That’s what changed my life. That’s what changes everybody’s life.”

[Fuck You Jobu]

Regarding Coach Swinney, I thought that John Oliver segment was a bit off, and if memory serves correctly, that clip he used was around the time SC Lawmakers were considering paying players.

Swinney went on to say that he is for changes in the rules, and "enhanced" scholarships, but against flat out paying his players. Oliver, as he and Stewart often due, use clips to "prove" their point, but fail to explain the full context. So now the world thinks Dabo is some selfish taskmaster, and take what Oliver said at 100% face value, when the truth is, it's far more complex.

Here is what he went on to say, but I'm sure John Oliver will never, ever mention this:

“When I was in college, it was the same discussion. I am 1,000 percent in favor of a stipend or a scholarship enhancement, modernizing the scholarship is probably the better term,” he said, “Because it hasn’t changed, yet it costs more to go to a movie, it costs more to buy gas, it costs more to wash your clothes than it did when I was in school.”
He is not in favor of bringing a professional flavor to intercollegiate athletics.
“There needs to be an adjustment there, but as far as professionalizing college athletics - first of all, college athletics would go away. I’m 1,000 percent against that. We’ve got enough entitlement in this country as it is and it totally devalues an education. It just blows my mind. They don’t even want to quantify an education. I’m standing here because I got my education.
“I didn’t get into coaching to make money. Coaches weren’t making any money when I got into coaching. I got into coaching because it’s what I wanted to do in my life and because it’s what I was passionate about, but I was able to do it because I had my education. That’s what changed my life. That’s what changes everybody’s life.”

What does ""enhanced" scholarships" mean? A college education is one of the least fungible forms of compensation. You can't buy food with it.

I love his comment on "entitlement". He makes millions of dollars a year. He is the .01%. How much more entitled can you get?

I don't see how college basketball is any different from professional basketball. Other than the fact the NCAA doesn't pay market rates for it's labor, what is the difference?

[Green Habit]

I don't see how college basketball is any different from professional basketball. Other than the fact the NCAA doesn't pay market rates for it's labor, what is the difference?

I get a bit bugged by the long shot clock, too many timeouts, lack of quarters, and the possession arrow. But that may not have been what you were going for.

[Green Habit]

“When I was in college, it was the same discussion. I am 1,000 percent in favor of a stipend or a scholarship enhancement, modernizing the scholarship is probably the better term,” he said, “Because it hasn’t changed, yet it costs more to go to a movie, it costs more to buy gas, it costs more to wash your clothes than it did when I was in school.”
“There needs to be an adjustment there, but as far as professionalizing college athletics - first of all, college athletics would go away. I’m 1,000 percent against that. We’ve got enough entitlement in this country as it is and it totally devalues an education. It just blows my mind. They don’t even want to quantify an education. I’m standing here because I got my education.
“I didn’t get into coaching to make money. Coaches weren’t making any money when I got into coaching. I got into coaching because it’s what I wanted to do in my life and because it’s what I was passionate about, but I was able to do it because I had my education. That’s what changed my life. That’s what changes everybody’s life.”

The bolded is something Swinney really shouldn't have said.

But I would like to know what his take is on endorsements. That, to me, is the most indefensible part of the NCAA rules. There's a difference between requiring schools to pay their players (which I'll admit, I'm not fully convinced on either way despite all the money colleges make off them), and forbidding players from receiving any type of compensation whatsoever, even if it's not coming from the schools.

[darth_vedder]

Regarding Coach Swinney, I thought that John Oliver segment was a bit off, and if memory serves correctly, that clip he used was around the time SC Lawmakers were considering paying players.

Swinney went on to say that he is for changes in the rules, and "enhanced" scholarships, but against flat out paying his players. Oliver, as he and Stewart often due, use clips to "prove" their point, but fail to explain the full context. So now the world thinks Dabo is some selfish taskmaster, and take what Oliver said at 100% face value, when the truth is, it's far more complex.

Here is what he went on to say, but I'm sure John Oliver will never, ever mention this:

“When I was in college, it was the same discussion. I am 1,000 percent in favor of a stipend or a scholarship enhancement, modernizing the scholarship is probably the better term,” he said, “Because it hasn’t changed, yet it costs more to go to a movie, it costs more to buy gas, it costs more to wash your clothes than it did when I was in school.”
He is not in favor of bringing a professional flavor to intercollegiate athletics.
“There needs to be an adjustment there, but as far as professionalizing college athletics - first of all, college athletics would go away. I’m 1,000 percent against that. We’ve got enough entitlement in this country as it is and it totally devalues an education. It just blows my mind. They don’t even want to quantify an education. I’m standing here because I got my education.
“I didn’t get into coaching to make money. Coaches weren’t making any money when I got into coaching. I got into coaching because it’s what I wanted to do in my life and because it’s what I was passionate about, but I was able to do it because I had my education. That’s what changed my life. That’s what changes everybody’s life.”

What does ""enhanced" scholarships" mean? A college education is one of the least fungible forms of compensation. You can't buy food with it.

I love his comment on "entitlement". He makes millions of dollars a year. He is the .01%. How much more entitled can you get?

I don't see how college basketball is any different from professional basketball. Other than the fact the NCAA doesn't pay market rates for it's labor, what is the difference?

I'm not entirely sure what "enhanced scholarship" means, but I know Dabo is for middle ground, especially with the food / shelter stuff. What I got from his full quote wasn't so much the entitlement part, but that there is middle ground to be had.

I'm not sure I agree with the degree not being worth anything. I think it is. Many of these players would not have an opportunity if not for their gifts, and the college is giving them that opportunity, be it pro sports, or a 4 year degree. That is worth a lot. Plus there are other perks the athletes get that others don't.

Also, b/c the coach makes a lot, John Oliver, you, imply the coaches are assholes. That may be true in some cases, but Dabo is different. He treats his players well, mama's like him, which is one of the reasons Clemson does well in recruiting. He also is very charitable with his money, and takes out of his salary to pay his assistants higher.

I'm all for changes to the NCAA, hell, I'd be happy if it went away, but I am not sold on flat out paying players. Some positive changes could be:

• *Better insurance - if injured make sure they are covered for that injury after college.
  *Higher stipened amounts - not sure if there is a standard. maybe raise it for the sports that make the most money (football / basketball).
  *Accept reasonable donations - allow the athletes to get donations (no more than "x" amount) and allow them to receive discounts where applicable.
  *Lax rules on food / shelter - I mean, c'mon, this should be a no brainer.

[Monkey_Driven]

I was pretty disappointed with the Oliver segment. He didn't really back up any of his points with facts other than the ad revenue.

[Fuck You Jobu]

I don't see how college basketball is any different from professional basketball. Other than the fact the NCAA doesn't pay market rates for it's labor, what is the difference?

I get a bit bugged by the long shot clock, too many timeouts, lack of quarters, and the possession arrow. But that may not have been what you were going for.

Haha, absolutely agree with the timeouts - esp TV.

[Fuck You Jobu]

Regarding Coach Swinney, I thought that John Oliver segment was a bit off, and if memory serves correctly, that clip he used was around the time SC Lawmakers were considering paying players.

Swinney went on to say that he is for changes in the rules, and "enhanced" scholarships, but against flat out paying his players. Oliver, as he and Stewart often due, use clips to "prove" their point, but fail to explain the full context. So now the world thinks Dabo is some selfish taskmaster, and take what Oliver said at 100% face value, when the truth is, it's far more complex.

Here is what he went on to say, but I'm sure John Oliver will never, ever mention this:

“When I was in college, it was the same discussion. I am 1,000 percent in favor of a stipend or a scholarship enhancement, modernizing the scholarship is probably the better term,” he said, “Because it hasn’t changed, yet it costs more to go to a movie, it costs more to buy gas, it costs more to wash your clothes than it did when I was in school.”
He is not in favor of bringing a professional flavor to intercollegiate athletics.
“There needs to be an adjustment there, but as far as professionalizing college athletics - first of all, college athletics would go away. I’m 1,000 percent against that. We’ve got enough entitlement in this country as it is and it totally devalues an education. It just blows my mind. They don’t even want to quantify an education. I’m standing here because I got my education.
“I didn’t get into coaching to make money. Coaches weren’t making any money when I got into coaching. I got into coaching because it’s what I wanted to do in my life and because it’s what I was passionate about, but I was able to do it because I had my education. That’s what changed my life. That’s what changes everybody’s life.”

What does ""enhanced" scholarships" mean? A college education is one of the least fungible forms of compensation. You can't buy food with it.

I love his comment on "entitlement". He makes millions of dollars a year. He is the .01%. How much more entitled can you get?

I don't see how college basketball is any different from professional basketball. Other than the fact the NCAA doesn't pay market rates for it's labor, what is the difference?

I'm not entirely sure what "enhanced scholarship" means, but I know Dabo is for middle ground, especially with the food / shelter stuff. What I got from his full quote wasn't so much the entitlement part, but that there is middle ground to be had.

I'm not sure I agree with the degree not being worth anything. I think it is. Many of these players would not have an opportunity if not for their gifts, and the college is giving them that opportunity, be it pro sports, or a 4 year degree. That is worth a lot. Plus there are other perks the athletes get that others don't.

Also, b/c the coach makes a lot, John Oliver, you, imply the coaches are assholes. That may be true in some cases, but Dabo is different. He treats his players well, mama's like him, which is one of the reasons Clemson does well in recruiting. He also is very charitable with his money, and takes out of his salary to pay his assistants higher.

I'm all for changes to the NCAA, hell, I'd be happy if it went away, but I am not sold on flat out paying players. Some positive changes could be:

• *Better insurance - if injured make sure they are covered for that injury after college.
  *Higher stipened amounts - not sure if there is a standard. maybe raise it for the sports that make the most money (football / basketball).
  *Accept reasonable donations - allow the athletes to get donations (no more than "x" amount) and allow them to receive discounts where applicable.
  *Lax rules on food / shelter - I mean, c'mon, this should be a no brainer.

In regards to the players getting a college education as compensation, how does that affect someone like Devin Hester? He's not intelligent at all, but he did bring in a lot of money to Miami, so how will an 'education' help him? He's not bright enough to graduate. To put it another way, say I wanted to hire you to come clean up my big yard that is full of dogshit. It's a huge yard with a lot of dogs and you'll work very hard shoveling >10hrs a day. I won't pay you any money. But I will teach how to become a super-advanced rocket engineer that will be worth millions!! This education does require a Mensa type intelligence. I'll see you reporting for work tomorrow, right? I mean the education is worth millions of dollars.

Also, how much of an "education" are most of these guys getting if they are spending all their time in the gym, going to meetings, practicing? It's basically a full time (+OT), so how much time is left for this "free education"? Some can manage sure, but as we're seeing more can't.... Look at the SEC graduation rates...

I'm not implying that the coach is an asshole because of that statement. I just think it's disingenuous and hypocritical to claim that people who are unpaid are "entitled" while you are making millions a year.

Sure they should be able to get food/shelter. And they should get insurance if injured while practicing/playing. That's a no-brainer. But why aren't they compensated at a market value like 99% of the other jobs. With training, gym, travel to games, meetings and practice, this is a fulltime job. Would you be working your fulltime job without money compensation and for free cafeteria food?

[Green Habit]

Also, b/c the coach makes a lot, John Oliver, you, imply the coaches are assholes. That may be true in some cases, but Dabo is different. He treats his players well, mama's like him, which is one of the reasons Clemson does well in recruiting. He also is very charitable with his money, and takes out of his salary to pay his assistants higher.

I did think this was Oliver's weakest point. I had basketball coaches in school that were nothing more than teachers that still cussed the shit out of us. And I laughed pretty hard when I saw Mike Leach on there, that guy is on a different thought level altogether.

I'm all for changes to the NCAA, hell, I'd be happy if it went away, but I am not sold on flat out paying players. Some positive changes could be:

• *Better insurance - if injured make sure they are covered for that injury after college.
  *Higher stipened amounts - not sure if there is a standard. maybe raise it for the sports that make the most money (football / basketball).
  *Accept reasonable donations - allow the athletes to get donations (no more than "x" amount) and allow them to receive discounts where applicable.
  *Lax rules on food / shelter - I mean, c'mon, this should be a no brainer.

My immediate changes would be the following:
--Allow players to seek endorsements, but in turn they have to pay for their own scholarships.
--If the school is paying for the scholarship, they have to grant all four years of it as long as the student meets typical academic standards and doesn't transfer. No pulling scholarships because you got injured or got cut.
--Speaking of transferring, abolish the one-year waiting period for transferring to another I-A school. This one especially drives me nuts when coaches don't have to wait.
--Abolish the forfeiture of all remaining years of eligibility if a player "turns pro". Give the student 4-5 years maximum, but it can be used at any time.

I may have forgotten more but between your list and my list we've made things a lot better for players without even answering how much of a cut, if any, they should get from athletics revenue (aside from stipends).

Finally, this isn't something the NCAA has control over but the NFL and NBA need to abolish their age limits. Stop using colleges as free farm systems and train your own damn players. Baseball does this just fine.

[Green Habit]

In regards to the players getting a college education as compensation, how does that affect someone like Devin Hester? He's not intelligent at all, but he did bring in a lot of money to Miami, so how will an 'education' help him? He's not bright enough to graduate. To put it another way, say I wanted to hire you to come clean up my big yard that is full of dogshit. It's a huge yard with a lot of dogs and you'll work very hard shoveling >10hrs a day. I won't pay you any money. But I will teach how to become a super-advanced rocket engineer that will be worth millions!! This education does require a Mensa type intelligence. I'll see you reporting for work tomorrow, right? I mean the education is worth millions of dollars.

Also, how much of an "education" are most of these guys getting if they are spending all their time in the gym, going to meetings, practicing? It's basically a full time (+OT), so how much time is left for this "free education"? Some can manage sure, but as we're seeing more can't.... Look at the SEC graduation rates...

I have a lot of conflicting thoughts on these facts, so this may be a real jumbled post that I may retract parts of later.

First, for the Devin Hesters of the world this is why the age limits need to go away. If a player just wants to make money by playing sports then let's stop the charades of forcing him to go through some collegiate hoops to get there. If 18-year olds can convince an NFL team to draft him or sign him as an undrafted free agent, more power to them. I think Hester in particular could have been an excellent returner even at that age. But if he didn't cut it that early at the pros, that's where the NCAA needs to be more understanding and let him use years of eligibility after such a failure.

As far as "education" goes, while what goes on in the classes may be the primary goal, that's not the only one. Hell, some schools and professors put up their curriculums online for free. The tangible value of what comes out of the cost of college is a degree, credentialism that society may put too much weight upon (but that's a different debate for a different day). But even if players are taking bullshit UNC-style classes, they're still learning plenty of things while on campus. You've got to have a crazy work ethic to meet the standards set by your team. You also get valuable experiences by working with other players who have a dissimilar upbringing. That may not be the traditional defintion of education but it's hardly worthless.

[Green Habit]

Mainly, I just think the NCAA needs to blow up, and a new governing body forms with things like actual regional conferences

I didn't want to let this slip, since I'm a conference realignment nerd. I've done something similar to this before, but what do you think of these eight regional conferences that mostly keep in line with what we have now and make sure that pretty much none of the major players get left out?

1. Original Pac-8 plus Boise State
2. Arizona, ASU, Colorado, Utah, BYU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech
3. Current Big Ten West, minus Purdue, plus Iowa State, Kansas, K-State
4. Current Big Ten East, plus Purdue and Notre Dame
5. Current SEC West plus TCU and SMU
6. Current SEC East plus Baylor and Houston
7. The ACC of the 1990s, minus Virginia and Maryland, plus Miami and Memphis
8. BC, UConn, Cincy, Louisville, Pitt, Syracuse, UVA, VT, WVU

For non-football you can throw in some combination of the Big East and A-10 as well. Maybe even the Missouri Valley and West Coast Conferences so Midwest and Western schools have closer teams to schedule in Olympic sports, and to not give teams like Gonzaga, St. Mary's, and Wichita State the shaft.

[darth_vedder]

I'm actually not opposed to 16 team power conferences. Let them leave the NCAA and new regional conferences emerge. These 5 or 6 conferences are their own governing body with their own rules. One of the conferences, with 4, 4 team pods would be the SCC (Southern Coastal Conference) consisting of:

Miami, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Georgia Tech, South Carolina, Clemson, North Carolina, Duke, NC State, Wake Forest, VA Tech, Virginia, Maryland, West Virginia, and Tennessee.

Pods would be:
Whatevername: West VA, VA Tech, Wake Forest, Tennessee

Anothername: Miami, Florida, Georgia, South Carolina

Basketball lovers: Maryland, Duke, North Carolina, Virginia

Pickaname: Ga Tech, NC State, Florida State, Clemson

[Electromatic]

I wonder how much the tax free component plays into this.

[darth_vedder]

Also, b/c the coach makes a lot, John Oliver, you, imply the coaches are assholes. That may be true in some cases, but Dabo is different. He treats his players well, mama's like him, which is one of the reasons Clemson does well in recruiting. He also is very charitable with his money, and takes out of his salary to pay his assistants higher.

I did think this was Oliver's weakest point. I had basketball coaches in school that were nothing more than teachers that still cussed the shit out of us. And I laughed pretty hard when I saw Mike Leach on there, that guy is on a different thought level altogether.

I'm all for changes to the NCAA, hell, I'd be happy if it went away, but I am not sold on flat out paying players. Some positive changes could be:

• *Better insurance - if injured make sure they are covered for that injury after college.
  *Higher stipened amounts - not sure if there is a standard. maybe raise it for the sports that make the most money (football / basketball).
  *Accept reasonable donations - allow the athletes to get donations (no more than "x" amount) and allow them to receive discounts where applicable.
  *Lax rules on food / shelter - I mean, c'mon, this should be a no brainer.

My immediate changes would be the following:
--Allow players to seek endorsements, but in turn they have to pay for their own scholarships.
--If the school is paying for the scholarship, they have to grant all four years of it as long as the student meets typical academic standards and doesn't transfer. No pulling scholarships because you got injured or got cut.
--Speaking of transferring, abolish the one-year waiting period for transferring to another I-A school. This one especially drives me nuts when coaches don't have to wait.
--Abolish the forfeiture of all remaining years of eligibility if a player "turns pro". Give the student 4-5 years maximum, but it can be used at any time.

I may have forgotten more but between your list and my list we've made things a lot better for players without even answering how much of a cut, if any, they should get from athletics revenue (aside from stipends).

Finally, this isn't something the NCAA has control over but the NFL and NBA need to abolish their age limits. Stop using colleges as free farm systems and train your own damn players. Baseball does this just fine.

Yep, this is what I'm talking about. Improvements like these would go a long way, and take a lot of the problems out of the picture. This is the type of middle ground I'd like to see come of all this.

[Monkey_Driven]

Also, b/c the coach makes a lot, John Oliver, you, imply the coaches are assholes. That may be true in some cases, but Dabo is different. He treats his players well, mama's like him, which is one of the reasons Clemson does well in recruiting. He also is very charitable with his money, and takes out of his salary to pay his assistants higher.

I did think this was Oliver's weakest point. I had basketball coaches in school that were nothing more than teachers that still cussed the shit out of us. And I laughed pretty hard when I saw Mike Leach on there, that guy is on a different thought level altogether.

I'm all for changes to the NCAA, hell, I'd be happy if it went away, but I am not sold on flat out paying players. Some positive changes could be:

• *Better insurance - if injured make sure they are covered for that injury after college.
  *Higher stipened amounts - not sure if there is a standard. maybe raise it for the sports that make the most money (football / basketball).
  *Accept reasonable donations - allow the athletes to get donations (no more than "x" amount) and allow them to receive discounts where applicable.
  *Lax rules on food / shelter - I mean, c'mon, this should be a no brainer.

My immediate changes would be the following:
--Allow players to seek endorsements, but in turn they have to pay for their own scholarships.
--If the school is paying for the scholarship, they have to grant all four years of it as long as the student meets typical academic standards and doesn't transfer. No pulling scholarships because you got injured or got cut.
--Speaking of transferring, abolish the one-year waiting period for transferring to another I-A school. This one especially drives me nuts when coaches don't have to wait.
--Abolish the forfeiture of all remaining years of eligibility if a player "turns pro". Give the student 4-5 years maximum, but it can be used at any time.

I may have forgotten more but between your list and my list we've made things a lot better for players without even answering how much of a cut, if any, they should get from athletics revenue (aside from stipends).

Finally, this isn't something the NCAA has control over but the NFL and NBA need to abolish their age limits. Stop using colleges as free farm systems and train your own damn players. Baseball does this just fine.

Yep, this is what I'm talking about. Improvements like these would go a long way, and take a lot of the problems out of the picture. This is the type of middle ground I'd like to see come of all this.

I like these improvements too. I have mixed feelings about age limits. Both the NFL and NBA would need to create (in the NFL's case) or improve (The D-League) their minor league system to welcome all of the kids leaving early. The athlete should also be allowed to go to college with some sort of penalty if they don't get drafted or picked up in free agency.

[Green Habit]

I like these improvements too. I have mixed feelings about age limits. Both the NFL and NBA would need to create (in the NFL's case) or improve (The D-League) their minor league system to welcome all of the kids leaving early. The athlete should also be allowed to go to college with some sort of penalty if they don't get drafted or picked up in free agency.

Let's take a fictional example based on the past for how I'd ideally see the system working. Let's go back to 2003 when Ernie Sims was rated the #1 overall recruit by Rivals. Matt Millen falls in love with him and the Lions draft him right after high school. However, it's clear that he's in over his head and he gets cut after two years. Sims still has strong sentiment to his hometown Tallahassee and then plays for FSU. He has three freakish years with the Seminoles, and then builds his pro stock better so that he returns to the NFL and does better than he did before.

[darth_vedder]

I like these improvements too. I have mixed feelings about age limits. Both the NFL and NBA would need to create (in the NFL's case) or improve (The D-League) their minor league system to welcome all of the kids leaving early. The athlete should also be allowed to go to college with some sort of penalty if they don't get drafted or picked up in free agency.

Let's take a fictional example based on the past for how I'd ideally see the system working. Let's go back to 2003 when Ernie Sims was rated the #1 overall recruit by Rivals. Matt Millen falls in love with him and the Lions draft him right after high school. However, it's clear that he's in over his head and he gets cut after two years. Sims still has strong sentiment to his hometown Tallahassee and then plays for FSU. He has three freakish years with the Seminoles, and then builds his pro stock better so that he returns to the NFL and does better than he did before.

I think this is interesting. So if a HS senior gets drafted, stays in the NFL for like 2 years, it's now working out and he's cut, then goes to college to play, he should be able to. If this player shines in college, and gets re-drafted, good for him. If not, he has a 4 year degree to better his chance of landing a job. I don't see a problem with that.