Dr. Boyce: "NCAA Athletes Now Demanding to be Paid Like their Coaches."

2»

Comments

  • Chef_Taylor
    Chef_Taylor Members Posts: 26,584 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    b*braze wrote: »
    thats the problem with ? . its a lot of 5* and 4*recruits right back in the hood, after they college career aint pan out, sellin weed and unemployable, with no skills except for running fast/jumping high, because they didnt take advantage of that oppurtunity they got being in college.

    Forreal..i bet every ? in here know a dude they grew up with or in tha hood who they say couldve made the league but ? off because all they was thinking was playing ball instead of putting whats most important first which is getting a degree.
  • MeekMonizzLLLLLLe14
    MeekMonizzLLLLLLe14 Members Posts: 15,337 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    b*braze wrote: »
    thats the problem with ? . its a lot of 5* and 4*recruits right back in the hood, after they college career aint pan out, sellin weed and unemployable, with no skills except for running fast/jumping high, because they didnt take advantage of that oppurtunity they got being in college.

    and culturally that is the problem. that degree is worth more than a shot at a pros in 90% of all cases. ? stealing laptops and selling drugs because any smart ? knows the average dealer makes less than minimum wage but a degree and connections with people you meet being a d-1 athlete will make you more money than dealing long term. the thing is though ? like me are taking that hustle that usually is with ? that gets you killed and using it professionally. if you are a black male there are programs/majors and companies that want you! Blogs/websites want a black perspective, accounting programs want more black applicants, businesses want minority interns. If you use the same amount of effort ? put to playing ball to the real world you would be surprised how far you could go.

    My fam moved out the hood when i was 4 but I know ? at my college dirt poor form the hood in my school hustling positively had 2 or 3 side jobs but now they got a good paying job. ? need to seriously be less focused on the field and more focused on the class room. ? whining like "it cant be done it cant be done!" but it CAN be done. You can play D-1 sports dirt poor and use that degree to make a good living.
  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    Monizzle14 wrote: »
    but not taking advantage of it is a you problem. obviously people don't have time during the long season but after all the ? is said and done people will remember you. obviously most ? not making it pro which might be the best thing ever. not making it pro and connecting with a booster after you graduate= a job without the pain and stress and shortness of being in the nfl. belive me i would love to have a scholarship and be busy and broke hell i hardly have money now as a reg student. I know tons of ? that would rather be broke on a full ride than broke without a full ride.

    and thats whats wrong with ? these days. you need to have that hustlers mentality and get the best you can out of a scholarship. ? need to be realistic about if they gunna get drafted and ? and if they realize they not start networking start making sure your degree is straight and ? . i know for a fact former players get job looks from boosters. weather its something as simple as being a personal trainer to something as complex as being an engineer. you can use that scholarship and fame to take your further than the average joe.

    but you talmbout the average kid tho................most college athletes are only 18-22 yrs old

    if no one taught them any better, or they aren't intellectually gifted enough to be intuitive to realize that they need to hustle on their own, you think it's right for the NCAA structure to take advantage of their hard work?

    keep it real tho, a lot of these mofos are broke before they get there, why wouldn't they trust a coach, a school, and a complete apparatus that says they are a legitimate authority

    it's one thing if we are talking about grown adults taking advantage of grown adults when it comes to business, but these are colleges taking advantage of mofos by offering them an education SMH

    morally and ethically that's ? up
    Monizzle14 wrote: »
    and culturally that is the problem. that degree is worth more than a shot at a pros in 90% of all cases. ? stealing laptops and selling drugs because any smart ? knows the average dealer makes less than minimum wage but a degree and connections with people you meet being a d-1 athlete will make you more money than dealing long term. the thing is though ? like me are taking that hustle that usually is with ? that gets you killed and using it professionally. if you are a black male there are programs/majors and companies that want you! Blogs/websites want a black perspective, accounting programs want more black applicants, businesses want minority interns. If you use the same amount of effort ? put to playing ball to the real world you would be surprised how far you could go.

    My fam moved out the hood when i was 4 but I know ? at my college dirt poor form the hood in my school hustling positively had 2 or 3 side jobs but now they got a good paying job. ? need to seriously be less focused on the field and more focused on the class room. ? whining like "it cant be done it cant be done!" but it CAN be done. You can play D-1 sports dirt poor and use that degree to make a good living.

    but culturally it's ok to take advantage of a college aged kid in the name of making money for your school? haha

    and if your fam moved out the hood when you were 4, it might be possible that you can't truly understand the perspective that makes these kids vulnerable to being taken advantage of in the 1st place


    many mofos don't even see college as an option without having a ball in their hands
  • b*braze
    b*braze Members Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    but culturally it's ok to take advantage of a college aged kid in the name of making money for your school? haha

    and if your fam moved out the hood when you were 4, it might be possible that you can't truly understand the perspective that makes these kids vulnerable to being taken advantage of in the 1st place


    many mofos don't even see college as an option without having a ball in their hands

    thats disingenuous... its a mutual gain. onesided when it comes to true star players ill admit, but for the overwhelming majority its a square deal.


    you go to a school to play sports (which is essentially an apprenticeship and audition for a professional team and oppurtunity to make millions of dollars in the future) and make us some money to keep this school and its athletic program running in the first place...

    in return they waive all your tuition fees allow you to take the courses of your choosing enabling you to choose a lucrative career should this sports thing not work out, give you free room and board for four years. all you gotta do is stay out of trouble, perform on the field when given an oppurtunity, and maintain a C average in your classes

    now dont forget they are offering that same deal to about 70-80 football players, 40 basketball players(men and women), 60 baseball/softball players, about 20 volleyball players, and give or take about another 150 athletes in various ? sports like track, swimming, tennis, golf, lacrosse or what have you...

    for four years each!

    all of a sudden that $10 million dollar local TV deal, merchandising, and ticket sales really dont seem like much when you also factor in all the coaches, training staff, medical staff, equipment, facilities, travel costs and various other employees that also needs to be paid for...


    yall cant see the forest for the trees


    are the schools taking advantage of the situation? yes... as they should.

    these kids can take advantage of whats being given to them as well
  • MeekMonizzLLLLLLe14
    MeekMonizzLLLLLLe14 Members Posts: 15,337 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    but you talmbout the average kid tho................most college athletes are only 18-22 yrs old

    if no one taught them any better, or they aren't intellectually gifted enough to be intuitive to realize that they need to hustle on their own, you think it's right for the NCAA structure to take advantage of their hard work?

    keep it real tho, a lot of these mofos are broke before they get there, why wouldn't they trust a coach, a school, and a complete apparatus that says they are a legitimate authority

    it's one thing if we are talking about grown adults taking advantage of grown adults when it comes to business, but these are colleges taking advantage of mofos by offering them an education SMH

    morally and ethically that's ? up



    but culturally it's ok to take advantage of a college aged kid in the name of making money for your school? haha

    and if your fam moved out the hood when you were 4, it might be possible that you can't truly understand the perspective that makes these kids vulnerable to being taken advantage of in the 1st place


    many mofos don't even see college as an option without having a ball in their hands

    but how do you expect an 18 year old to manage cash? if the ? is "too much" then shouldn't a prospective athlete not sign a contract. as i keep saying you can accept or deny a contract. how much fairer is it going to get? at 18 you can join the army they are explpoiting people more than the NCAA.
  • Will Munny
    Will Munny Members Posts: 30,199 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited October 2011
    What the ? do you mean they don't get paid? Andrew Luck didn't go out for the draft last year because he didn't wanna take a pay cut.
  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    b*braze wrote: »
    thats disingenuous... its a mutual gain. onesided when it comes to true star players ill admit, but for the overwhelming majority its a square deal.


    you go to a school to play sports (which is essentially an apprenticeship and audition for a professional team and oppurtunity to make millions of dollars in the future) and make us some money to keep this school and its athletic program running in the first place...

    in return they waive all your tuition fees allow you to take the courses of your choosing enabling you to choose a lucrative career should this sports thing not work out, give you free room and board for four years. all you gotta do is stay out of trouble, perform on the field when given an oppurtunity, and maintain a C average in your classes

    now dont forget they are offering that same deal to about 70-80 football players, 40 basketball players(men and women), 60 baseball/softball players, about 20 volleyball players, and give or take about another 150 athletes in various ? sports like track, swimming, tennis, golf, lacrosse or what have you...

    for four years each!

    all of a sudden that $10 million dollar local TV deal, merchandising, and ticket sales really dont seem like much when you also factor in all the coaches, training staff, medical staff, equipment, facilities, travel costs and various other employees that also needs to be paid for...


    yall cant see the forest for the trees


    are the schools taking advantage of the situation? yes... as they should.

    these kids can take advantage of whats being given to them as well

    bruh, but you can't equivocate and spread those costs like that when one sport is a cash cow more than another

    they transitioned this ? into a business..................nothing is requiring these colleges to promote these games so that the NCAA and the colleges can make more money

    they existed for over 50 years at the current structure without the need for TV contracts and ?


    so because the business is run poorly, you think it's fair to screw some kid over just because his sport brings in the money and another sport doesn't?

    that's a pure waste of money..............if tennis, lacrosse, swimming teams can't be funded off of their own existence then the school should cut those programs.................not misuse the funds from another program (the basketball or football team) to subsidize it

    that's like saying it's wrong to pay people welfare (paying football players, except they actually do work), but you still justified in raising taxes (raising ticket prices for games) so you can continue to run some unnecessary govt program (subsidizing other sports people don't pay to see) so somebody else can keep a high paying job (the lacrosse coach)

    you saying we can't see the forest for the trees, but you think that is right?
    Monizzle14 wrote: »
    but how do you expect an 18 year old to manage cash? if the ? is "too much" then shouldn't a prospective athlete not sign a contract. as i keep saying you can accept or deny a contract. how much fairer is it going to get? at 18 you can join the army they are explpoiting people more than the NCAA.

    the military has a VA to insure that military members are cared for if they are hurt, or taken advantage of

    so that's not really a good analogy



    ? some kid over with the promise of an education is ? up because there are no safeguards for the kid, so at least if you paid them something, it makes it a little more fair
  • b*braze
    b*braze Members Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    bruh, but you can't equivocate and spread those costs like that when one sport is a cash cow more than another

    they transitioned this ? into a business..................nothing is requiring these colleges to promote these games so that the NCAA and the colleges can make more money

    they existed for over 50 years at the current structure without the need for TV contracts and ?

    and yet.. thats what they do. you sayin this ? like i came up with this plan. it is what it is.

    so because the business is run poorly, you think it's fair to screw some kid over just because his sport brings in the money and another sport doesn't?

    that's a pure waste of money..............if tennis, lacrosse, swimming teams can't be funded off of their own existence then the school should cut those programs.................not misuse the funds from another program (the basketball or football team) to subsidize it

    schools dont have seperate athletic departments for each sport. its ONE athletic department per school. they spread the money around how they see fit at each particular school. and im pretty sure it aint evenly. the baseball team, no matter how successful, more than likely aint gettin as much as the basketball team, and the basketball team no matter how successful isnt getting as much as the football team.

    also having only one AD is why the ncaa took into account the shady dealings between tim floyd and oj mayo when they dropped the hammer on USC for lack of institutional control, stripping our football team of scholarships and postseason bowl games, and the former athletic director had to step down.

    that's like saying it's wrong to pay people welfare (paying football players, except they actually do work), but you still justified in raising taxes (raising ticket prices for games) so you can continue to run some unnecessary govt program (subsidizing other sports people don't pay to see) so somebody else can keep a high paying job (the lacrosse coach)

    you saying we can't see the forest for the trees, but you think that is right?

    i dont see it as an issue of right or wrong, i see it as a business. whether or not you like it, these schools have a right to turn a profit, to keep their instituions running.


    and any player worth paying(and even some who dont) are more than compensated when they turn pro. its called paying your dues, which is what they are doing in college.



    and how many high paid lacrosse coaches have you ever heard of? lol
  • b*braze
    b*braze Members Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    and for you "pay the players" people... how exactly would you pay out this money? a flat rate for all players? class rates(fr, so, jr, sr)? performance based?

    is there a salary cap? free agency?
  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    b*braze wrote: »
    and yet.. thats what they do. you sayin this ? like i came up with this plan. it is what it is.

    schools dont have seperate athletic departments for each sport. its ONE athletic department per school. they spread the money around how they see fit at each particular school. and im pretty sure it aint evenly. the baseball team, no matter how successful, more than likely aint gettin as much as the basketball team, and the basketball team no matter how successful isnt getting as much as the football team.

    also having only one AD is why the ncaa took into account the shady dealings between tim floyd and oj mayo when they dropped the hammer on USC for lack of institutional control, stripping our football team of scholarships and postseason bowl games, and the former athletic director had to step down.

    i dont see it as an issue of right or wrong, i see it as a business. whether or not you like it, these schools have a right to turn a profit, to keep their instituions running.


    and any player worth paying(and even some who dont) are more than compensated when they turn pro. its called paying your dues, which is what they are doing in college.

    and how many high paid lacrosse coaches have you ever heard of? lol

    bruh, but your argument is that you don't see anything wrong with the current structure because the other costs associated with other parts of an athletic program justify it in your opinion

    1st, college shouldn't be considered a business. that's why there is a distinction between "nonprofit" and for profit schools

    especially if it's a state community system school, you basically paying taxes for a state school to run their ? like a for profit business............that should ? anybody off cause that's damn near equivalent to extortion to a tax payer


    2nd, if you respect the game as if it were truly a business, then you obviously know that businesses shouldn't be allowed to survive by wasting their money on assets that don't generate income

    if the lacrosse team can't bring it's own money in, that's poor business management to keep the team thru the use of funds from another program

    that just further backs my argument about how college football players are being pimped SMH


    last, you'd be surprised to know how many college lacrosse coaches are making six figures LOL






    all I'm saying is call the ? what it is.................50 yrs ago, colleges somehow manage to survive and even thrive without the need for deals with Nike and TV network contracts

    if schools can transition to a "for profit" like structure, then they should pay their workers................especially the mofos who bring in the most income for the school
  • b*braze
    b*braze Members Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    bruh, but your argument is that you don't see anything wrong with the current structure because the other costs associated with other parts of an athletic program justify it in your opinion

    wrong.
    1st, college shouldn't be considered a business. that's why there is a distinction between "nonprofit" and for profit schools

    especially if it's a state community system school, you basically paying taxes for a state school to run their ? like a for profit business............that should ? anybody off cause that's damn near equivalent to extortion to a tax payer

    then it should be free to attend for everyone. and your tax dollars should be paying for these kids to play football, and pay for equipment. travel. hotels. room and board. etc

    2nd, if you respect the game as if it were truly a business, then you obviously know that businesses shouldn't be allowed to survive by wasting their money on assets that don't generate income

    if the lacrosse team can't bring it's own money in, that's poor business management to keep the team thru the use of funds from another program

    you assume lacrosse isnt generating any income. ive never watched a lacrosse game in my life but obviously there are people that do. and any school that has a functioning lacrosse team, is obviously generating some kind of income. and not every school is fielding a lacrosse team. you're obsessed with lacrosse for some reason.

    that just further backs my argument about how college football players are being pimped SMH


    last, you'd be surprised to know how many college lacrosse coaches are making six figures LOL

    all I'm saying is call the ? what it is.................50 yrs ago, colleges somehow manage to survive and even thrive without the need for deals with Nike and TV network contracts

    if schools can transition to a "for profit" like structure, then they should pay their workers................especially the mofos who bring in the most income for the school

    yeah and back then they wore leather helmets lol, didnt provide their players with the same kind of fitness facilities, equipment and other amenities the players are enjoying now. the stadiums didnt have big screens, the teams didnt ride chartered buses or planes. didnt have full time doctors and medical staffs. they didnt have climate controlled practice facilities. times have changed.

    without these schools turning a profit, cross country out of conference games arent financially possible. the game would be regional as ? . the ability to go cross country and TV deals to broadcast these games help with recruiting to bring better players to these schools

    ever wonder why small schools cant recruit 5*, 4* or even 3* caliber players?


    how many businesses provide their employees room and board and provide free career training on the same level as a 4 year degree? these college coaches are also giving them career training if they do plan to go pro?

    i aint sayin the system perfect, but a lot of you "pay the players" ? not seein the big picture
  • blakfyahking
    blakfyahking Members Posts: 15,785 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    b*braze wrote: »
    wrong.

    then clarify your argument brethren. what was your point in bringing up how athletic departments spread the profits of one program across all the programs in their department ?
    b*braze wrote: »
    then it should be free to attend for everyone. and your tax dollars should be paying for these kids to play football, and pay for equipment. travel. hotels. room and board. etc

    it should be free in theory, that's the point

    there is a reason why they distinguish between for profit and nonprofit institutions

    but that is an entirely different convo

    b*braze wrote: »

    you assume lacrosse isnt generating any income. ive never watched a lacrosse game in my life but obviously there are people that do. and any school that has a functioning lacrosse team, is obviously generating some kind of income. and not every school is fielding a lacrosse team. you're obsessed with lacrosse for some reason.

    bruh, I'm confused

    you made the statement that there aren't that many lacrosse coaches getting paid well

    I only brought up lacrosse cause you started talking about how athletic departments spread their profits amongst all the sports programs in their own ADs (athletic departments)

    my premise is that each program should bring in its own revenue, if the school is worried about truly being equitable and fair

    you shouldn't be able to justify getting bread off of a football player by saying it's ok just because you subsidize a lacrosse player as well

    that's just evidence that you should be paying the true worth of the football player
    b*braze wrote: »

    yeah and back then they wore leather helmets lol, didnt provide their players with the same kind of fitness facilities, equipment and other amenities the players are enjoying now. the stadiums didnt have big screens, the teams didnt ride chartered buses or planes. didnt have full time doctors and medical staffs. they didnt have climate controlled practice facilities. times have changed.

    really? they wore leather helmets in 1980? LOL

    c'mon doggy, times did change..............sports programs have turned into actual income generating businesses for colleges

    we know for a fact all that money isn't going into strictly facilities like you saying

    otherwise some schools should have better facilities than some NFL teams.................and even mofos on the worst NFL teams get paid something *shrugs*

    b*braze wrote: »

    without these schools turning a profit, cross country out of conference games arent financially possible. the game would be regional as ? . the ability to go cross country and TV deals to broadcast these games help with recruiting to bring better players to these schools

    ever wonder why small schools cant recruit 5*, 4* or even 3* caliber players?

    nonprofit schools shouldn't be turning a "profit" in the 1st place

    cause if they don't, that's what alumni donations and taxpayer money is used for

    small schools can't get high caliber players because the NCAA system is just professionally sanctioned amateur level sports............it's a business

    and in a business employees should get paid
    b*braze wrote: »

    how many businesses provide their employees room and board and provide free career training on the same level as a 4 year degree? these college coaches are also giving them career training if they do plan to go pro?

    i aint sayin the system perfect, but a lot of you "pay the players" ? not seein the big picture

    plenty of businesses do so..............the military is one as an example

    and funny enough even they pay their people LOL
  • Datdude87
    Datdude87 Members Posts: 3,627 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    i jus want another college hoops game...
  • b*braze
    b*braze Members Posts: 8,968 ✭✭✭
    edited November 2011
    then clarify your argument brethren. what was your point in bringing up how athletic departments spread the profits of one program across all the programs in their department ?

    my argument isnt saying its alright/ok/good. im just telling you the reality of the situation.

    it should be free in theory, that's the point

    there is a reason why they distinguish between for profit and nonprofit institutions

    but that is an entirely different convo

    absolutely



    bruh, I'm confused

    you made the statement that there aren't that many lacrosse coaches getting paid well

    I only brought up lacrosse cause you started talking about how athletic departments spread their profits amongst all the sports programs in their own ADs (athletic departments)

    my premise is that each program should bring in its own revenue, if the school is worried about truly being equitable and fair

    you shouldn't be able to justify getting bread off of a football player by saying it's ok just because you subsidize a lacrosse player as well

    that's just evidence that you should be paying the true worth of the football player

    and what would that be?

    in any case collegiate sports is an extracurricular activity. and a sport like lacrosse is popular amongst a certain type of student/alumni... you already know where im goin with this


    really? they wore leather helmets in 1980? LOL

    was 1980 50 years ago? LOL. check your math homie


    c'mon doggy, times did change..............sports programs have turned into actual income generating businesses for colleges

    we know for a fact all that money isn't going into strictly facilities like you saying

    otherwise some schools should have better facilities than some NFL teams.................and even mofos on the worst NFL teams get paid something *shrugs*

    of course, they are professionals. and i didnt say it all goes to facilities. i named various things the money goes to


    nonprofit schools shouldn't be turning a "profit" in the 1st place

    cause if they don't, that's what alumni donations and taxpayer money is used for

    small schools can't get high caliber players because the NCAA system is just professionally sanctioned amateur level sports............it's a business

    and in a business employees should get paid


    the "employees", real and student athletes are being paid. student athletes aint gettin cut a check but they gettin fed and housed and college educated free of charge


    plenty of businesses do so..............the military is one as an example

    and funny enough even they pay their people LOL

    military aint a business. we get paid with your tax dollars


    in the end my point is... if we pay these players then we should drop this "student athlete" charade and call it what it is...nfl/nba development league. no more scholarships. no relation to the school at all besides the logo on their chests. the schools shouldnt house or educate them. and when the season ends pretty much the players are on their own until time for training camp