Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

unions coming to college ball


stirs

Recommended Posts

the education isn't free, the "trips" all over the country are for games they're not a perk. Free publicity and popularity? I bet Cade Foster was loving it when he was getting death threats for losing an "amateur" sporting event.  Free access to the doctor for injuries sustained playing their sport which is again not optional.  They need money to buy things, the same reason you need money.  Or do you work for education and meals in your workplace cafeteria?

 

Those genius kids can get money when and where they want, athletes can't. 

 

Full ride scholarships are free. Must be nice, huh? Oh, do you mean the books they must buy for the classes they don't care about?

 

Seeing other parts of the country and being away with your team seems like a perk to me. Maybe you don't like road trips?

 

Nice, one example, Cade Foster. Other than that they can get the hottest women, are the life of parties, etc.

 

You said health insurance. Pretty sure that team doctor takes care of them for everything. And yes, playing is optional. They can quit whenever they want.

 

When did we all start feeling SO sorry for these POOR POOR children? The day college athletes have it as bad as sweat shop workers is the day you can claim they need money.

 

Wow, the big evil white man 1%er is making all this money using the kids' names! Oh no! If the kids don't like it, THEY CAN QUIT. Oh THAT'S RIGHT ... they're using their free ride and using the university to go pro and become millionaires. Seems pretty even to me. (hey ... School Ties!!!)

 

I'm sorry every athlete you know is dirt poor, their parents abandonded them, and they have $0 in their bank accounts. Maybe going to college shouldn't be the right thing to do at the current time ... you know, since they can't afford shampoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Full ride scholarships are free. Must be nice, huh? Oh, do you mean the books they must buy for the classes they don't care about?

Seeing other parts of the country and being away with your team seems like a perk to me. Maybe you don't like road trips?

Nice, one example, Cade Foster. Other than that they can get the hottest women, are the life of parties, etc.

You said health insurance. Pretty sure that team doctor takes care of them for everything. And yes, playing is optional. They can quit whenever they want.

When did we all start feeling SO sorry for these POOR POOR children? The day college athletes have it as bad as sweat shop workers is the day you can claim they need money.

Wow, the big evil white man 1%er is making all this money using the kids' names! Oh no! If the kids don't like it, THEY CAN QUIT. Oh THAT'S RIGHT ... they're using their free ride and using the university to go pro and become millionaires. Seems pretty even to me. (hey ... School Ties!!!)

I'm sorry every athlete you know is dirt poor, their parents abandonded them, and they have $0 in their bank accounts. Maybe going to college shouldn't be the right thing to do at the current time ... you know, since they can't afford shampoo.

No I mean the fact that if they don't play they don't get the education.. That means it's not free. That's nice that you think mandatory work trips are a perk I guess.

They get the hottest women and are the life of parties? So you're also supporting female students being turned into prostitutes since obviously sex is part of their compensation right? No? Then maybe stick to what they actually get.

It's even because a tiny fraction of those athletes make millions? Really? So as long as somebody at your workplace gets paid you don't need to be right? When do we all get to vote on how much money you need?

Why should athletes be unpaid? Do you actually have an answer other than "that's the way it is"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I mean the fact that if they don't play they don't get the education.. That means it's not free. That's nice that you think mandatory work trips are a perk I guess.

They get the hottest women and are the life of parties? So you're also supporting female students being turned into prostitutes since obviously sex is part of their compensation right? No? Then maybe stick to what they actually get.

It's even because a tiny fraction of those athletes make millions? Really? So as long as somebody at your workplace gets paid you don't need to be right? When do we all get to vote on how much money you need?

Why should athletes be unpaid? Do you actually have an answer other than "that's the way it is"?

 

They can easily get the education if they don't play, but now they have to pay tuition. Which how many will do? They're going there to become millionaires, not study. Mandatory work trips? LOL. This isn't "work". They aren't employees. Taking a trip somewhere away from boring school, with your buddies, to play a game you love? Sounds better than writing an essay.

 

Prostitution? What the heck are you talking about? The popular guys always gets the girl. 

 

Yes, I'd say it's even. The school uses you to generate entertainment for a sport we all love. You use the school to help get you into the pros ... or you use the school to get your degree and get a great job. Do you care at all if a school uses non-athletes in any way at all to make money? Do you fight for their injustice?

 

I've explained multiple times why they shouldn't be paid. Too many cans of worms.

 

But here goes ... do you pay everyone equally between male and female sports? Do you pay lesser sports the same as the big money makers? If not, what happens when the females and the lacrosse team revolt? What then? What about the two big sports? Does the superstar get paid as much as the schmuck who rides the bench all season? If not, what happens when the rest of the team refuses to play until they get paid as much as the star? What happens when a school like Michigan can pay more players than a school like Charlotte can? Does that mean they get the best team? Charlotte just has to suck it up? Does that mean a player who would be a superstar on Charlotte will be a second stringer on Michigan because he makes more money there? Will the Union be able to be fair to everyone? And where does all this money come from? Will the NCAA force the schools to fork over money to these kids? Good luck with that. Will the NCAA foot the bill? 

 

Paying players has nothing to to with right or wrong or if kids need money. It has to do with it will cause an insane amount of politics and choices made by the few. It's a nightmare waiting to happen.

 

Why don't you tell me why they should get paid, and how to do it. OTHER than Johnny needs shampoo, his family is broke, and he's not allowed to get a part time job. Because that is a very small percentage of what's happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can easily get the education if they don't play, but now they have to pay tuition. Which how many will do? They're going there to become millionaires, not study. Mandatory work trips? LOL. This isn't "work". They aren't employees. Taking a trip somewhere away from boring school, with your buddies, to play a game you love? Sounds better than writing an essay.

 

 

do you know the percentage of college athletes that turn pro?

 

what is it like 2% or even less than that?

 

and furthermore, what percentage of student athletes could afford school if they decided to quit their sport?

 

i'm on the fence about this, but you are speaking in absolutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes they can get an education by enrolling and paying for it, that has nothing to do with what I said. I said the education isn't free because they're providing a service in exchange for it and if they stop providing it they lose the education. A FREE education would mean they get it whether they play sports or not.

"Getting the girl" is completely irrelevant to the topic, it's not part of what they get to play for the school so I don't know why you brought it up.

Once again the other students don't have any restrictions on how they can make money. If a student is generating money for the school through research, performing arts etc they're free to go make money doing the same thing elsewhere while continuing their education. If an athlete tries to make money playing sports or using their name in any way they lose their eligibility.

Basically they shouldn't be paid because you can't figure out a fair system so let's keep the unfair system in place? Cool. What happens when Cam Newton gets paid more than Derek Anderson? Guess pro athletes shouldn't get paid. What happens when some players are on scholarship and others have to walk on? Guess there shouldn't be athletic scholarships. What happens when some students get academic scholarships and others have to take out loans? Whoops guess all scholarships have to go. Things are already unfair why is that suddenly an obstacle?

They should get paid because they're generating millions and millions of dollars for their schools every year participating in activities that could seriously damage their future earnings potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julius Peppers is a perfect example of what is wrong with using the term "Student Athlete" when it comes to big money college athletics.

Julius Peppers was an athlete posing as a student.

High school student athletes that want a college education should strive to academically qualify for the university of their choice.

High school student athletes that have no interest in higher education and want to pursue a professional sports career should join a minor league team/farm system.

Sorry sports fans, colleges need to refocus their efforts on the task they were created to address: Higher education, NOT big money sports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand the argument for it.  But I also have a hard time when people say that student athletes are "uncompensated" when I've been crushed under the weight of my wife's student loans for the last 7 years, the balance of which is still greater than the original amount borrowed (interest still accrues while you're in school) and is greater than my yearly salary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paying college athletes is such a horrid idea. Most people keep thinking about it from a top college football team perspective that generates millions of dollars where it would seem to make sense to pay the players. The fact remains that the majority of college athletic departments are losing money or barely getting by. What do you think paying players is going to do for the small schools and their athletic budgets? They are going to cut every non profitable sport from their universities. So now because we are paying collegiate athletes some softball player from Iowa just lost her scholarship opportunity. This will wreck collegiate sports as we know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would like to force profit sharing on College athletics. Even the playing field and provide more scholarships for all students from the revenue gained. Imagine how many kids could go to school if you took Bama, Florida, FSU, LSU, USCal, OSU, Michigan and made them dole out that cash instead of paying coaches 5 mil per.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Student "Unions" force payment of athletes.

 

Big schools offer most money, monopolize best players.

 

People who once advocated for paying STUDENT ATHLETES now complain Unions ruined College Athletics.

 

 

Are you under the impression there's some sort of even playing field right now?  The argument about small schools not being able to pay players will most likely be moot when they separate the five major conferences from the rest this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...