Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Oct 10, 2019 7:23:09 GMT -5
Can’t wait until players are advertising for Vegas casinos. 😎👍🏻
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Oct 10, 2019 8:51:37 GMT -5
And how is that different than how it is now? Do you think the current system where it is pretty clear the cheaters are winning is working? There are tons of rich alum at schools including Georgetown that don’t care enough to cheat because they value what Georgetown stands for and how it has always run a clean program. Now if paying no longer is illegal and that alum can benefit their business then we are likely to get a more level playing field. The more participants in a market the better. I think it will make the disparity between the have's and have not basketball schools worse because it essentially legitimizes their cheating and washes them of their past misdeeds. Now the bluebloods won't need to even hide their cheating and can go all out. It's like the steroid era in baseball. No rules and the players went crazy with roids. The blue blood boosters will just mobilize their booster base and $$$ to make a kid who decides to go to his school go viral on youtube ($$$) or give those recruits huge windfalls for their likeness on a T-shirt regardless of the actual popularity of the player or the youtube content. At least right now you still have small schools like Butler, UVA and Villanova who can make the Final Four and compete with the blue bloods. I think if you are going to have some kind of pay for play rule then it should be equal across the board (one fixed salary for everyone) or the potential for abuse by the blue bloods is huge. If a player thinks their value is worth more than that fixed salary (the 1% Zion Williamson type) then they should have the option to go straight from high school to NBA. I agree with this. I also think highly academic schools like Georgetown would suffer in a free for all situation. The majority of the on campus population does not care about Georgetown Sports. State schools with more alums and more engaged alums will definitely benefit over the current BE schools which have smaller alumni bases. I think players should get compensated for example if a video game gets made that uses the likeness of all college players, but I don't like the idea that anyone could just give them money under pretense of compensating them for something but really just paying them to attend their institution. There needs to be something in place to stop an all out free for all. Maybe a salary cap? I don't think there's an easy solution. I like the idea that players should get a portion of the money from say jersey sales of their number, but again that seems like it would punish schools with smaller followings who won't buy as many jerseys. Maybe a portion of every jersey sale from every school gets put into a fund and divided equally among all players?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 10, 2019 9:17:46 GMT -5
And how is that different than how it is now? Do you think the current system where it is pretty clear the cheaters are winning is working? There are tons of rich alum at schools including Georgetown that don’t care enough to cheat because they value what Georgetown stands for and how it has always run a clean program. Now if paying no longer is illegal and that alum can benefit their business then we are likely to get a more level playing field. The more participants in a market the better. I think it will make the disparity between the have's and have not basketball schools worse because it essentially legitimizes their cheating and washes them of their past misdeeds. Now the bluebloods won't need to even hide their cheating and can go all out. It's like the steroid era in baseball. No rules and the players went crazy with roids. The blue blood boosters will just mobilize their booster base and $$$ to make a kid who decides to go to his school go viral on youtube ($$$) or give those recruits huge windfalls for their likeness on a T-shirt regardless of the actual popularity of the player or the youtube content. At least right now you still have small schools like Butler, UVA and Villanova who can make the Final Four and compete with the blue bloods. I think if you are going to have some kind of pay for play rule then it should be equal across the board (one fixed salary for everyone) or the potential for abuse by the blue bloods is huge. If a player thinks their value is worth more than that fixed salary (the 1% Zion Williamson type) then they should have the option to go straight from high school to NBA. Why do you think there won't be rules for how kids are paid? BB schools already have a big advantage, that won't change under any system... The other fact that won't change when it pertains to college basketball is the fact that you can only have 13 players at a time, the blue blood boogeyman boosters that folks are so worried about can throw a lot of cash around but these schools can't have everyone... So a small school like UVA(which has an undergrad enrollment twice the size of Duke) will still be able to get talented players just as they do now... To me, the excuses & reasonings being thrown out are founded in perceptions, not facts. In one vote in 2014 P5 schools decided to start "paying" kids the COA stipend, where was the outrage from some of you on that new proposal? The schools in the BE didn't fold up their programs, did they? Nope, they just started "paying" the COA stipend as well... Also, this stipend is not equal across the board either, even within conferences but somehow schools like Georgetown are able to still pull in good players... The same goes for the new rule on 24/7 unlimited food for athletes, none of you detractors said a word about that either even though the rich schools went buck wild with spending on that new rule. Again, "smaller" schools adapted to that rule change as well... My theory is that whatever rules come about on compensating players non-blue blood schools will still thrive as they do now...
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Oct 10, 2019 10:44:57 GMT -5
The key would be the establishment of the rules governing payments. I have not read the California legislation, but I have not seen any details indicating that it does limit the amount paid for endorsements or who can make the payments.
The best potential outcome is forcing the NCAA to establish rules and guidelines that benefit athletes without creating an unfettered system. Theoretically another concern - tied to the provision in the Cal. bill and others that are making their way through different state legislatures - is what is in effect a blanket prohibition of schools (and by extension the NCAA) in any way penalizing the athletes for receiving pay. The NCAA could propose or establish rules that would allow compensation but with reasonable limits or restrictions (yeah I know, we are talking about the NCAA, but this is just theoretical), but states could simply reject those rules and maintain the prohibitions of any penalties for athletes or for schools in the respective states. Missouri or Florida or Illinois adopts and incorporates NCAA rules limiting athlete income to $25,000 or $50,000 or $100,000; California or Texas allows unlimited income. Where is a five-star recruit who is offered a $500,000 endorsement deal from Nike if he goes to Oregon more likely to sign?
If the NCAA can come up with fair and reasonable rules and guidelines, they might win a court challenge to their authority to enforce those rules. As it stands right now, very possible it would not win that case.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 10, 2019 12:47:21 GMT -5
Jay Wright gets it...
Ed Cooley doesn't...
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Oct 10, 2019 15:18:41 GMT -5
Jay Wright gets it... Ed Cooley doesn't... Hard to say whether Coach Cooley gets it or not off of this response because we don't know what question he was asked, how it was phrased, and in what context...
|
|
|
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on Oct 10, 2019 15:50:49 GMT -5
Cooley's spot on regarding UConn in any event.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Oct 10, 2019 16:07:05 GMT -5
And how is that different than how it is now? Do you think the current system where it is pretty clear the cheaters are winning is working? There are tons of rich alum at schools including Georgetown that don’t care enough to cheat because they value what Georgetown stands for and how it has always run a clean program. Now if paying no longer is illegal and that alum can benefit their business then we are likely to get a more level playing field. The more participants in a market the better. I think it will make the disparity between the have's and have not basketball schools worse because it essentially legitimizes their cheating and washes them of their past misdeeds. Now the bluebloods won't need to even hide their cheating and can go all out. It's like the steroid era in baseball. No rules and the players went crazy with roids. The blue blood boosters will just mobilize their booster base and $$$ to make a kid who decides to go to his school go viral on youtube ($$$) or give those recruits huge windfalls for their likeness on a T-shirt regardless of the actual popularity of the player or the youtube content. At least right now you still have small schools like Butler, UVA and Villanova who can make the Final Four and compete with the blue bloods. I think if you are going to have some kind of pay for play rule then it should be equal across the board (one fixed salary for everyone) or the potential for abuse by the blue bloods is huge. If a player thinks their value is worth more than that fixed salary (the 1% Zion Williamson type) then they should have the option to go straight from high school to NBA. No offense but how can it get much worse than it is now? You see where all the top kids end up each year? That is not by coincidence. I am a pretty rich person that really wants the Hoyas to be good again. I would never break the rules or go through the trouble of breaking the rules to sway a kid to the Hoyas. If it becomes legal and I think that I may be able to help well that changes everything. Yes there are bigger fan bases than Georgetown but don't underestimate the wealth of the fan base especially compared to the larger state schools who don't have the quality of education. Regardless this is not about Georgetown or even college basketball only. This is about do what is right and fair. If the Hoyas somehow are harmed by this then so be it. I will be OK with that. I don't think that will happen because well they by all accounts do it the right way now so it can't get worse. I like the way EtomicB keeps bringing up the boogeyman because that is what it seems like the detractors are scared of. There won't be many athletes that are getting these huge deals that aren't already getting them. This is about allowing those that aren't getting them right now to make some money. Every college athlete could be making extra money right now if they were allowed. Those that think this is all about booster payments or shoe deals are thinking very narrow-minded. Why should it be fixed? If a player turns into a social media superstar and can make millions off of that why should they be limited? As I brought up the kicker for UCF was making so much he gave up his scholarship. If that YouTube money wasn't going to him it would've just gone to Google? Who do you think needs it more him or Google? In basketball there will always be teams that have a chance unless they change the rules and make players stay for 3 years like baseball and football. The good kids leave early which usually gives the teams with the older players the chance to win. Old guys win in college basketball not the guys that will be the best one day. That is thanks to 1 and done. Nothing will change with paying players in that regard unless they change that rule. That is the reason there is much less parity in college football and the small schools never have a chance.
|
|
|
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on Oct 10, 2019 16:24:20 GMT -5
Hoyainla, Etomic, Hoyas4Ever, all interesting points that have made me think harder on the issue, although I initially was somewhat reactively against your position. Serious question: do you guys think that players should have a right to complete their education if they leave early? Does it matter when they leave (i.e., frosh or later)? Does it matter if they are in good academic standing when they leave? If yes, does it matter how much money they now make or have made since leaving early?
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 10, 2019 17:08:40 GMT -5
Jay Wright gets it... Ed Cooley doesn't... Hard to say whether Coach Cooley gets it or not off of this response because we don't know what question he was asked, how it was phrased, and in what context... Regardless of what the question was his response of “we provide everything they need but now it’s has turned into a want” sounds like he thinks what’s being “given” right now is plenty, if that’s the case then I don’t agree with that thought in anyway...
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Oct 10, 2019 18:21:34 GMT -5
Hoyainla, Etomic, Hoyas4Ever, all interesting points that have made me think harder on the issue, although I initially was somewhat reactively against your position. Serious question: do you guys think that players should have a right to complete their education if they leave early? Does it matter when they leave (i.e., frosh or later)? Does it matter if they are in good academic standing when they leave? If yes, does it matter how much money they now make or have made since leaving early? I appreciate you for having an open mind on it. Most people have already made up the matter. As for your question. I do not think there is much actual cost associated with allowing a player to come back and take classes. By that I mean no college is running at full efficiency so the cost of adding a couple of players to classes is essentially nothing. The true costs of athletes comes with housing, food, and staff. Those are not given to or needed by players that would come back. I think these schools allow these players to come back not because it's the right thing to do, but because it makes the school look good the rare times it happens. That being said if a trade off of allowing to benefit of your likeness is that if you leave early you can't come back then I think that is more than a fair trade.
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Oct 10, 2019 23:47:43 GMT -5
While everyone is concerned with the pay for likeness aspect of college athletics, this is the real crime that's occurring in college athletics especially in the BIG money maker football. Read the thread...
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Oct 11, 2019 9:27:52 GMT -5
While everyone is concerned with the pay for likeness aspect of college athletics, this is the real crime that's occurring in college athletics especially in the BIG money maker football. Read the thread... This feeds into why I am so adamant that these players can make money. For a lot of them this will be the highest earning potential point of their lives. I think many here look at this through the aspect of college basketball because the Hoyas are a basketball school. Look at it through the point of the football players many of whom will never make.a $ playing professionally. Do you really think the degree, if they even get it, is worth it for a player that snuck into college thanks to the very low requirements or that was likely dragged along while in college just so they could stay eligible. Many of these players don’t have the scholastic aptitude to grasp the high level learning they are getting.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 11, 2019 9:33:28 GMT -5
Do you really think the degree, if they even get it, is worth it for a player that snuck into college thanks to the very low requirements or that was likely dragged along while in college just so they could stay eligible. Many of these players don’t have the scholastic aptitude to grasp the high level learning they are getting. Nearly every study indicates that the lifetime income of a college graduate far exceeds that of those that drop out. Very few athletes on the whole "sneak" into college. Their academic ranges, across the enterprise, are comparable to applicant pools at large, unless you're ready to go down the very slippery slope that athletes are somehow different from the population as a whole.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Oct 11, 2019 10:01:18 GMT -5
Do you really think the degree, if they even get it, is worth it for a player that snuck into college thanks to the very low requirements or that was likely dragged along while in college just so they could stay eligible. Many of these players don’t have the scholastic aptitude to grasp the high level learning they are getting. Nearly every study indicates that the lifetime income of a college graduate far exceeds that of those that drop out. Very few athletes on the whole "sneak" into college. Their academic ranges, across the enterprise, are comparable to applicant pools at large, unless you're ready to go down the very slippery slope that athletes are somehow different from the population as a whole. I am absolutely ready to go down whatever slope you want that college football and basketball players are many standard deviations outside the normal college student pool. You can get into college with a 2.0 GPA as long as you are good enough. Do you think that a person with a 2.0 has any business trying to get a degree? If you think very few sneak in you must not have a lot of experience around major football programs. By sneak I mean they had no chance of attending that college if they weren’t great athletes. Of course they will be given all the “help” they need to stay eligible but what good is that really doing them? The study I would like to see is the breakdown of professions of college basketball and football players 10 years after college. The reason those with a degree make more is because they are usually smarter. It has very little to do with the degree itself. I could get into a whole discussion about how degrees and college itself are wastes of time and money outside of specific areas but this is not the place for that.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 11, 2019 11:57:15 GMT -5
I am absolutely ready to go down whatever slope you want that college football and basketball players are many standard deviations outside the normal college student pool. You can get into college with a 2.0 GPA as long as you are good enough. Do you think that a person with a 2.0 has any business trying to get a degree? If you think very few sneak in you must not have a lot of experience around major football programs. By sneak I mean they had no chance of attending that college if they weren’t great athletes. Of course they will be given all the “help” they need to stay eligible but what good is that really doing them? The study I would like to see is the breakdown of professions of college basketball and football players 10 years after college. The reason those with a degree make more is because they are usually smarter. It has very little to do with the degree itself. I could get into a whole discussion about how degrees and college itself are wastes of time and money outside of specific areas but this is not the place for that. Don't confuse Georgetown with the overall cohort of students vs. athletes. There are 3.6 million high school graduates in the US and athletes are no different along the scale--some are at the very top, most are in the middle, and some are on the bottom. The standard deviation bell curve is largely the same whether your forte is sports or music or Snapchat or simply listening to music in your car. A number of colleges don't require a 2.0 to be admitted. Liberty, for one (in their online program). Full Sail is another. Everyone in this country has an opportunity to succeed and if athletics helps them along that journey, good for them.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Oct 11, 2019 13:19:34 GMT -5
Don't confuse Georgetown with the overall cohort of students vs. athletes. There are 3.6 million high school graduates in the US and athletes are no different along the scale--some are at the very top, most are in the middle, and some are on the bottom. The standard deviation bell curve is largely the same whether your forte is sports or music or Snapchat or simply listening to music in your car. A number of colleges don't require a 2.0 to be admitted. Liberty, for one (in their online program). Full Sail is another. Everyone in this country has an opportunity to succeed and if athletics helps them along that journey, good for them. You are right to some extent, but I think the college admissions scandal affecting Lori Loughlin, Felicity Huffman, etc. clearly demonstrate that many universities use more lenient standards to bring in top athletes. And, I don't have a problem with that as long as people like Loughlin aren't cheating the system (it still befuddles me that these people didn't simply give the money legally to universities instead, especially those who spend hundreds of thousands of dollars). But, it would be disingenuous to act like athlete admissions are the same as regular admissions - and it's not just Georgetown. That said, are there athletes across the curve from really smart to less so? Of course. We've had players who have made the All Big East Academic team with over 3.0 at Georgetown, and we've had guys who have been kicked off the team for sub-part academics. But, that's a separate issue from admissions policies. But, I agree with you. People who use athletics as a way to advance themselves should absolutely take the opportunity.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Oct 11, 2019 14:08:05 GMT -5
Never underestimate what a high school coach will do to get his player a scholarship. There are no lines many won’t cross. There are ways to get the student qualified, most of them very shady.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Oct 11, 2019 14:52:19 GMT -5
I am absolutely ready to go down whatever slope you want that college football and basketball players are many standard deviations outside the normal college student pool. You can get into college with a 2.0 GPA as long as you are good enough. Do you think that a person with a 2.0 has any business trying to get a degree? If you think very few sneak in you must not have a lot of experience around major football programs. By sneak I mean they had no chance of attending that college if they weren’t great athletes. Of course they will be given all the “help” they need to stay eligible but what good is that really doing them? The study I would like to see is the breakdown of professions of college basketball and football players 10 years after college. The reason those with a degree make more is because they are usually smarter. It has very little to do with the degree itself. I could get into a whole discussion about how degrees and college itself are wastes of time and money outside of specific areas but this is not the place for that. Don't confuse Georgetown with the overall cohort of students vs. athletes. There are 3.6 million high school graduates in the US and athletes are no different along the scale--some are at the very top, most are in the middle, and some are on the bottom. The standard deviation bell curve is largely the same whether your forte is sports or music or Snapchat or simply listening to music in your car. A number of colleges don't require a 2.0 to be admitted. Liberty, for one (in their online program). Full Sail is another. Everyone in this country has an opportunity to succeed and if athletics helps them along that journey, good for them. Yes athletes may have equal representation of HS graduates as a whole but they don't have equal representation of those that actually go to college. I guarantee that if you look at the bottom say 100 students at a college based on their HS GPA and SAT/ACT they will 99% be athletes with a big donor's kid throw in for good measure. While there may be a football or basketball player in the top 5% there won't be many if any. Did the UNC academic scandal not teach us anything? Do you really think that was an isolated situation? Justin Fields recently said in an interview he has only been on the OSU campus a couple of times because all his classes are online lol. I am sure they are very stringent with those online classes. It's amazing how when the NCAA started punishing schools for athletes in bad academic standing the number of graduates rose. Almost like magic These college don't care if these athletes get an education. They just care that they are eligible so they can win games. If the athlete wants to assert themselves then yes they will get a proper education but as Cardale Jones famously said "We ain't come to play school". I am all for these athletes using their athletic ability to get a degree no matter how tainted it may be if the school chooses to do that. That has nothing to do with getting paid for their likeness though.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Oct 11, 2019 15:58:54 GMT -5
Never underestimate what a high school coach will do to get his player a scholarship. There are no lines many won’t cross. There are ways to get the student qualified, most of them very shady. Kinda get where you're going but it's hard for HS coaches to beat the NCAA clearinghouse these days... Someone( Hoyas4Ever) can correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure players have to meet certain requirements by set times in high school in order to qualify for a scholarship... A player can't load up on classes in his senior year anymore...
|
|