Holy shit. Today we get a TR from Japan with a load of man meat on it and then a two page discussion about some guy's cannon.
WTF?
I played college baseball, and I didn't get paid... but, we did get excessive meal money, and lots of free equipment that I returned to the store for cash. My freshman year I returned 3 or 4 $200 bats to the sporting goods store.
This, and I played for a mid-level Division One college baseball program. I know the top-10 teams get a lot more than we did... and football programs are probably leaps and bounds above that.
Kyle Boller could throw the ball through the uprights from the 50 on his knees.
Russell would do his game well to stay for his senior season. LSU fan was screaming for him to be benched earlier in the season.
My point was that these players get used for their abilities, and then left on the side of the road, usually without a college degree. I don't doubt that a lot of players get pocket change/car/free rent, or whatever while they are playing. Catch up with those same players 24 months after they played their last game and see how many of them are still benefitting from making their schools and sponsors millions and millions of dollars.
Same here. The Nike cleats we were given (each year) sucked, and we got new underarmour year after year- I only needed one set. Everything was sold. Combined with the per diem, it wasnt too bad. However, it wasnt the same as getting paid. Football programs are so much different. Same with basketball. They dont get "paid", but they do just fine- living in nice houses off campus, driving nice cars...with what income? They play a sports, they dont have jobs. Im not complaining or anything- I could honestly not care less. They get a free education, and the opportunity to showcase their talents for professional teams.
Decisions Decisions
The ones that went to class, actually paid attention, and graduated still benefit 24 months later. Around these parts if you are a UT athelete and graduate if you are remotely qualified your resume will go to the top of the stack, I'd suspect it is pretty much the same in some other parts of the country.
Flip-flopping your trust fund logic, shouldn't the atheletes that turn pro have a mandatory residual come from their paychecks to go back to the schools that gave them the exposure to make it to the pros?
Also, the schools are NOT making millions of dollars off of the athletes. They are receiving millions of dollars from outside sources for (mostly) the television rights to broadcast games and then in turn using those revenues to fund women's sports and stuff like lacrosse and soccer (and paying their football coaches a healthy salary). Most athletic programs in the country are lucky to break even and even a lot of the big names operate in the red.
Now back on topic, Jemarcus Russell kicked ass last night. Notre Dame has an average (15-20'sh) team and LSU made them look pathetic.
I should probably change my username to IReallyDon'tTeleMuchAnymoreDave.
I just poured out some of my 40 for Tostitos, Nokia, FedEx, and Citi. All unfortunate companies operating in the red. When will these guys catch a break?
Huh? Maybe you misread something, or missed the point by like 15 miles. The point, again, is that schools and corporations make millions on the backs of these college players. You say "the schools are NOT making millions of dollars off of the athletes. They are receiving millions of dollars from outside sources for (mostly) the television rights to broadcast games." Um, who do you think makes these "broadcasted" games valuable? Those guys on the field perhaps? And who cares what the colleges use the money for. they are still making tens of millions of dollars for bowl game appearances (not to mention all the other sources of income). Sure, some of the players benefit from the college system and make money in the pros. Thats what college is. A not for profit place of learning for students to use to go on to have careers. Its the 99% of students who don't end up professional athletes, the ones still making the college and advertisers millions of dollars, that get the raw end.
Last edited by Long Duck Dong; 01-04-2007 at 01:18 PM.
I think the point you missed is that Tostitos, etc are not schools. I'm not arguing that some folks are not making millions in the process, but it is not the schools. The NCAA, maybe, the bowl sponsors, maybe, FOX TV, maybe, but not the schools.
I should probably change my username to IReallyDon'tTeleMuchAnymoreDave.
Let me preface this by saying that you are not ever going to find a bigger ND fan than me.
I have been saying that they are overrated all year. They just do not have the athletes to hang with the USCs and good SEC teams of the world. With the job that Weis is doing recruiting, that might change. Maybe.
As for Quinn, he is maybe the 5th best qb in D1. I'd say Leak, Russel, Smith, the guy from Louisville who's name I forget, and Booty are all better athletes with more consistent arms, or at least more likely to succeed at the NFL level. Quinn is the next Rick Mirer.
This sucks.
Looking California, feeling Minnesota.
How so? Agreed, football and to a much lesser extent mens basketball generate huge revenues to the schools. In general those revenues subsidize the non-revenue generating sports at the schools.
So, I guess what you are saying is that the players in revenue generating sports should get some sort of revenue sharing (pay-for-play) and the atheletes in the non revenue producing (i.e. money losing) sports should A) not get any scholarships and B) have to pay TO play.
I should probably change my username to IReallyDon'tTeleMuchAnymoreDave.
i guess I mean he has more potential.......Quinn has topped out I think.
I've seen Leak do things quinn could only dream about.
Looking California, feeling Minnesota.
[QUOTE=teledave;1067123]How so? Agreed, football and to a much lesser extent mens basketball generate huge revenues to the schools. In general those revenues subsidize the non-revenue generating sports at the schools.
QUOTE]
Im pretty sure basketball is just as big- having more games helps, and March Madness puts the BCS to shame.
Anyway...continue. I think if the players get paid its not college anymore- its already the pros. The players that wont make it still played the sport they love and got an education for free. What you learn in college sports will help you after school (leadership etc). Schools put up a huge amount of money to have top notch programs (facilities, coaches, compliance) and deserve some return on their investment. That being said, Id have more of a problem paying players than keeping it amateur. Plus, how do you determine how much each player gets paid?
By the way, most schools lose money on their bowl games. Say they earn 5 million for th Rose Bowl- Wisconsin a few years ago spent almost 10 mill sending the team, administrators, boosters, etc for the game and a week at top notch places.
Decisions Decisions
Outstanding point. The schools argument was half my point, with corporate revenues being the other. And the point that you are adding that is completely irrelevant is what the schools are doing with these huge revenues. I don't care. It's meaningless to my point, which is that these schools take in large revenues as a direct result of players who receive nothing (legally).
Forget it man, I'm arguing in circles.
Agree to Disagee.
Wish I was in UT skiing right now instead of in my office arguing athletic revenue sharing.
I should probably change my username to IReallyDon'tTeleMuchAnymoreDave.
You are confusing net and gross revenues, gross revenues don't mean a fucking thing. The reality is that most athletics departments are not self sufficient and are subsidized by your good old tax dollars, and the hard earned dollars of wealthy alumni and local businesses.
Bookmarks