|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 19, 2012 21:21:37 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by coachrobpsl on Jul 19, 2012 21:28:22 GMT -6
Please tell me it does not involve PSU.
|
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 19, 2012 22:17:44 GMT -6
Please tell me it does not involve PSU. It does but it is also about how schools have let money dictate every decision there is to make in football. He argues that schools need to take back control of the teams and bring them back to their original intention which was involved with academics, or else they should just admit that they're nothing more than a farm system for the NFL. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 20, 2012 9:13:49 GMT -6
I am not going to talk about anything related to the Sandusky/PSU situation but... I think the state of college football is very delicately balanced on a few points. I heard a few reporters talking/arguing on ESPN about allowing transfers without penalty. I think this would be a catastrophic mistake for college athletics period. They were basically talking about a scholarship athlete being able to transfer, be given an athletic scholarship at his new school and be able to play immediately. I am assuming this is an off season transfer and not a middle of the season transfer. To me that would just turn college football into a free agent market. We already have those issues in HS athletics as soon as we started open enrollment, at first it became a free for all on kids changing school districts and it's still that way. Then the OHSAA in all of their wizdumb said "they have to move" well spectacular...now parents just rent an apartment and their kid lives there or doesn't live there... I believe the kid that made that change came from my first school. He was a state runner up as a junior in wrestling. We had a kid move in who was better. He couldn't beat him so he tried to move up to 3 weight classes in either direction, had some health issues when he cut the weight to go down 3 classes. Understanding that he wasn't going to be able to wrestle for our school, he up and transfers mid season to a bigger school. Goes there, wins a state title at his normal weight class, as soon as the wrestling finals were over, he transfered back to graduate. - I think it was this situation that made the OHSAA change their policy. But we all know kids who "move" to another district while their entire family stays where they have always lived. I hope NCAA sports do not institute a free transfer rule. What would stop a school from openly pursing a guy like Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin...2 very good players on teams who had no real chance at a National Title...but there were a few teams who were maybe a QB away, or a RB away or a WR away...you know what I'm saying. That is the one thing I hate about professional athletics. I guess I'm just old. It wasn't that way when I grew up. Jack Lambert was not going to be wearing any other helmet. Guys just didn't move like they do now. Too much about money anymore - at the professional level AND at the NCAA level. Another point - not really football related but NCAA basketball related. Kentucky's entire starting 5 left - WTF??? While some may think NCAA football is just a farm league for the NFL, NCAA basketball is OBVIOUSLY nothing more than that. I guess that's why I only watch the tournament. The "solution" is simple...but deep down, NOBODY wants it. So the system evolves to what it is. |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 9:48:12 GMT -6
It's more or less a sickening culture that surrounds the money sports in college athletics. Look at how Syracuse and Pitt destroyed not only the Big East's football pedigree, but look at what they did to Big East basketball all in the name of securing ACC television money. Look at how Texas forms their own network with ESPN and pisses off Texas A&M off so much they decide to jump ship to the SEC. Look at how Missouri decided that the rivalry game with Kansas isn't worth keeping when compared to the SEC money they're now going to get.
The most sickening thing is the playoff system. Sure it's great for the fans, and the alumni and the boosters and the coaches and the athletic administrators. They don't have to play extra games, they don't have to worry about suffering from potentially deadly head injuries. I also love how everyone gets their pockets fattened with the new TV money: the coaches, the athletic directors, everyone except the practically slave labor (student athletes) who actually do the work and can't have any piece of the pie. Coach X can make $3 million but if one of his players has a bartender give him free drinks the NCAA will come down with the hammer and suspend such student.
I'm not advocating that players even get paid; I think it would be better to cap coaches' salaries at $1 million. If you wouldn't coach a college team for that amount of money then all of your bs talk of molding young men into leaders is exactly that: BS.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachdennis on Jul 20, 2012 10:29:08 GMT -6
Here's the issue as I see it:
What the national sports media and the casual fan sees as college football is only a tiny fraction of it. They see a few dozen of the top BCS schools, and think that this is college football. The reality is that college football is more accurately represented by the huge number of Division II, Division III, NAIA and Junior College teams who play. The problem that the NCAA has is that the rules they might make for a top shelf BCS school also apply to Pacific Lutheran, St. John's, Mount Union, etc.
I look at it this way - the upper echelons of the BCS are their own entity, and it is, in fact, a farm system for the NFL. College football as a whole is more properly represented by the other levels, and they appear to be doing just fine...
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 20, 2012 10:39:54 GMT -6
It's more or less a sickening culture that surrounds the money sports in college athletics. Look at how Syracuse and Pitt destroyed not only the Big East's football pedigree, but look at what they did to Big East basketball all in the name of securing ACC television money. Look at how Texas forms their own network with ESPN and pisses off Texas A&M off so much they decide to jump ship to the SEC. Look at how Missouri decided that the rivalry game with Kansas isn't worth keeping when compared to the SEC money they're now going to get. The most sickening thing is the playoff system. Sure it's great for the fans, and the alumni and the boosters and the coaches and the athletic administrators. They don't have to play extra games, they don't have to worry about suffering from potentially deadly head injuries. I also love how everyone gets their pockets fattened with the new TV money: the coaches, the athletic directors, everyone except the practically slave labor (student athletes) who actually do the work and can't have any piece of the pie. Coach X can make $3 million but if one of his players has a bartender give him free drinks the NCAA will come down with the hammer and suspend such student. I'm not advocating that players even get paid; I think it would be better to cap coaches' salaries at $1 million. If you wouldn't coach a college team for that amount of money then all of your bs talk of molding young men into leaders is exactly that: BS. The Big East was doomed from the beginning. As soon as they started a basketball-only league that included football schools they were screwed. It was just a matter of time. The playoffs are dangerous? Which playoffs? The D.1A playoff is only one extra game. Lower levels have a full playoff. Is that what you're talking about? If so, if you think that's for the money you're off base. Nobody makes money off of the 1AA, D.2, or D.3 playoffs. Capping salaries? Who's going to do that? Why not do that in HS? Should state associations cap coaches' stipends? At what figure? |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 20, 2012 11:54:19 GMT -6
I'm not sure you can call the student's slave labour. Four years education at a top university can be worth up to $200,000. The amortized value of salary difference between having a BA and having a HS education is estimated at a million dollars over a lifetime. There's also the benefits of having virtually unlimited access to trainers, medical coverage, etc.
There is defnitely some Marxist-style exploitation of the worker, but that's capitalism. I went to university on a full-ride scholarship (not football) and there's no free lunch, they don't just give you anything, you have to work your butt off. It's roughly the same proposition time and effort-wise as someone who holds down part-time jobs during school to graduate debt-free.
|
|
|
|
Post by airman on Jul 20, 2012 12:03:12 GMT -6
I would like to see the 20 hour rule actually enforced. Most teams violate the spirit of the rule. Most teams do not require weight lifting in the Am but try not showing up. Most teams do not require film study on your own but try not doing it. This is how colleges exploit their players.
I would like to see no academic exemptions. Either you make it in as a regular student or you go to Junior college or community college. JC/CC is where those in need of remedial academics are supposed to go.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 20, 2012 12:13:59 GMT -6
I would like to see the 20 hour rule actually enforced. Most teams violate the spirit of the rule. Most teams do not require weight lifting in the Am but try not showing up. Most teams do not require film study on your own but try not doing it. This is how colleges exploit their players. I would like to see no academic exemptions. Either you make it in as a regular student or you go to Junior college or community college. JC/CC is where those in need of remedial academics are supposed to go. Keep in mind that admissions requirements are artificial and arbitrary. They're mostly used to cut down on the number of applicants. When a college's admissions requirements are raised is that because their curriculum has changed? |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 19:39:30 GMT -6
I'm not sure you can call the student's slave labour. Four years education at a top university can be worth up to $200,000. Sorry, I was reading Jason Whitlock earlier and the slave labor metaphor is his favorite to use. I know that the term "slave labor" has a bad history so I probably shouldn't have used it. But it is true that everyone gets rich off of college football, except for the students. Example: Jim Tressel made $3.5 million in 2010. That same year some of his students decided to sell their own stuff for spending money and tattoos, and you swear the world had come to an end. (Source on Tressel's salary: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/09/jim-tressel-money-217-millilon_n_922593.html) On ESPN's 30 for 30 special about Miami football one of their QB's mentioned how he saw his own teammates stealing car stereos because they needed to sell them for spending money so that they could eat or take their girlfriend out on a date. They weren't allowed a job while playing sports and many came from poor neighborhoods so that was their only option. On the other hand, for some of the athletes (not all, but some) they don't care about the education that they're getting. They go in, enroll in a communications degree or a general studies degree, wait three years and try for the NFL draft. The education doesn't matter because to them playing D1A football is like being on a AAA team for Major League Baseball. It's the wrong opinion for them to have but hey the prospect of making millions of dollars playing in the NFL at 21-22 is a pretty good motivation. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 20, 2012 19:43:40 GMT -6
I'm not sure you can call the student's slave labour. Four years education at a top university can be worth up to $200,000. Sorry, I was reading Jason Whitlock earlier and the slave labor metaphor is his favorite to use. I know that the term "slave labor" has a bad history so I probably shouldn't have used it. But it is true that everyone gets rich off of college football, except for the students. Example: Jim Tressel made $3.5 million in 2010. That same year some of his students decided to sell their own stuff for spending money and tattoos, and you swear the world had come to an end. (Source on Tressel's salary: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/09/jim-tressel-money-217-millilon_n_922593.html) On ESPN's 30 for 30 special about Miami football one of their QB's mentioned how he saw his own teammates stealing car stereos because they needed to sell them for spending money so that they could eat or take their girlfriend out on a date. They weren't allowed a job while playing sports and many came from poor neighborhoods so that was their only option. On the other hand, for some of the athletes (not all, but some) they don't care about the education that they're getting. They go in, enroll in a communications degree or a general studies degree, wait three years and try for the NFL draft. The education doesn't matter because to them playing D1A football is like being on a AAA team for Major League Baseball. It's the wrong opinion for them to have but hey the prospect of making millions of dollars playing in the NFL at 21-22 is a pretty good motivation. Do you think that athletes are the only students on campus who don't have a lot of spending money? |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 19:49:27 GMT -6
It's more or less a sickening culture that surrounds the money sports in college athletics. Look at how Syracuse and Pitt destroyed not only the Big East's football pedigree, but look at what they did to Big East basketball all in the name of securing ACC television money. Look at how Texas forms their own network with ESPN and pisses off Texas A&M off so much they decide to jump ship to the SEC. Look at how Missouri decided that the rivalry game with Kansas isn't worth keeping when compared to the SEC money they're now going to get. The most sickening thing is the playoff system. Sure it's great for the fans, and the alumni and the boosters and the coaches and the athletic administrators. They don't have to play extra games, they don't have to worry about suffering from potentially deadly head injuries. I also love how everyone gets their pockets fattened with the new TV money: the coaches, the athletic directors, everyone except the practically slave labor (student athletes) who actually do the work and can't have any piece of the pie. Coach X can make $3 million but if one of his players has a bartender give him free drinks the NCAA will come down with the hammer and suspend such student. I'm not advocating that players even get paid; I think it would be better to cap coaches' salaries at $1 million. If you wouldn't coach a college team for that amount of money then all of your bs talk of molding young men into leaders is exactly that: BS. The Big East was doomed from the beginning. As soon as they started a basketball-only league that included football schools they were screwed. It was just a matter of time. The playoffs are dangerous? Which playoffs? The D.1A playoff is only one extra game. Lower levels have a full playoff. Is that what you're talking about? If so, if you think that's for the money you're off base. Nobody makes money off of the 1AA, D.2, or D.3 playoffs. Capping salaries? Who's going to do that? Why not do that in HS? Should state associations cap coaches' stipends? At what figure? I was only referring to the four team playoff being implemented in 2014 by the FBS schools. I actually love D1AA, D2 and D3 football. To me they are the embodiment of amateur athletics. D1A is not in my opinion. It's a farm system for the NFL and I don't like how the athletic directors and the conference commissioners put on this song and dance routine about how it still is an amateur league. They do this song and dance routine so that the profits aren't taxed at a normal rate (bowl games for instance are considered non-profit entities). www.smartmoney.com/spend/family-money/10-things-college-football-wont-say-1317598414326/ |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 20, 2012 19:56:06 GMT -6
The Big East was doomed from the beginning. As soon as they started a basketball-only league that included football schools they were screwed. It was just a matter of time. The playoffs are dangerous? Which playoffs? The D.1A playoff is only one extra game. Lower levels have a full playoff. Is that what you're talking about? If so, if you think that's for the money you're off base. Nobody makes money off of the 1AA, D.2, or D.3 playoffs. Capping salaries? Who's going to do that? Why not do that in HS? Should state associations cap coaches' stipends? At what figure? I was only referring to the four team playoff being implemented in 2014 by the FBS schools. I actually love D1AA, D2 and D3 football. To me they are the embodiment of amateur athletics. D1A is not in my opinion. It's a farm system for the NFL and I don't like how the athletic directors and the conference commissioners put on this song and dance routine about how it still is an amateur league. They do this song and dance routine so that the profits aren't taxed at a normal rate (bowl games for instance are considered non-profit entities). www.smartmoney.com/spend/family-money/10-things-college-football-wont-say-1317598414326/Yeah but you said that your problem with the playoff is that it's dangerous. Why is a bowl game and a championship game more dangerous than four playoff games in the lower levels? |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 20:00:23 GMT -6
Sorry, I was reading Jason Whitlock earlier and the slave labor metaphor is his favorite to use. I know that the term "slave labor" has a bad history so I probably shouldn't have used it. But it is true that everyone gets rich off of college football, except for the students. Example: Jim Tressel made $3.5 million in 2010. That same year some of his students decided to sell their own stuff for spending money and tattoos, and you swear the world had come to an end. (Source on Tressel's salary: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/09/jim-tressel-money-217-millilon_n_922593.html) On ESPN's 30 for 30 special about Miami football one of their QB's mentioned how he saw his own teammates stealing car stereos because they needed to sell them for spending money so that they could eat or take their girlfriend out on a date. They weren't allowed a job while playing sports and many came from poor neighborhoods so that was their only option. On the other hand, for some of the athletes (not all, but some) they don't care about the education that they're getting. They go in, enroll in a communications degree or a general studies degree, wait three years and try for the NFL draft. The education doesn't matter because to them playing D1A football is like being on a AAA team for Major League Baseball. It's the wrong opinion for them to have but hey the prospect of making millions of dollars playing in the NFL at 21-22 is a pretty good motivation. Do you think that athletes are the only students on campus who don't have a lot of spending money? No and believe me I was pretty poor and starving for spending money when I went to college (I still am out of college too lol). However I wasn't risking my neck every day at practice and every Saturday at a game so that I could make everyone richer (coaches, administrators) except for myself. Hell even though it would be unfair because the smaller schools would be at a disadvantage part of me likes Steve Spurrier's idea where the players can be paid out of the coaches' own salary. (I don't think such an idea would be fair or practical so I don't actually support it, but I like the spirit of the idea.) |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 20:06:43 GMT -6
I was only referring to the four team playoff being implemented in 2014 by the FBS schools. I actually love D1AA, D2 and D3 football. To me they are the embodiment of amateur athletics. D1A is not in my opinion. It's a farm system for the NFL and I don't like how the athletic directors and the conference commissioners put on this song and dance routine about how it still is an amateur league. They do this song and dance routine so that the profits aren't taxed at a normal rate (bowl games for instance are considered non-profit entities). www.smartmoney.com/spend/family-money/10-things-college-football-wont-say-1317598414326/Yeah but you said that your problem with the playoff is that it's dangerous. Why is a bowl game and a championship game more dangerous than four playoff games in the lower levels? You're right I did say that. That's why I started this discussion just to get some opinions down and challenge my beliefs. You're right I was wrong to say it's more dangerous. I think it's unfair, but it is not any less dangerous. |
|
|
|
Post by gian3074 on Jul 20, 2012 21:48:29 GMT -6
But give me a break on the "slave labor" sentiment - playing college football is not even remotely close to slavery. Do the schools make money off these kids? No question. What do they get in return? An Education. Funny - I never hear any other sport being brought up when some start saying "college athletes should be paid". Only football and basketball. One of my coaches, his sister is on OSU's rowing team, they won't the national title - first, how many of you even knew that? 2nd - what would be the appropriate compensation for her? How much money does she get per week or per month? How are you going to pay them? Does Andrew Luck get the same amount as does the #4 QB on the roster? If so - that's not fair. Andrew is out there putting his health at risk while the rest of the QB's on the roster hold clipboards and wear their hats backwards on the sideline. Does RG3 get more or less money that his center? Do players at Florida get the same amount as the kids at UConn? Do the schools make money off of the kids? Absolutely. But I'm pretty sure GM made money off of my uncle who worked there for 35 years - what did he get in exchange? About $30/hr (I don't really know) - he sure as heck didn't get a college education - otherwise he wouldn't have been running the damm hoist at GM, he would have been designing the brake pads for the car... A very well thought out argument and I agree. The number one reason why they won't be able to pay athletes in the two revenue generating sports is Title IX. Paying athletes would be a logistical nightmare. My main argument is that I'm sick of the culture, this idea that television money is the most important thing for these schools. And I hope that no one ever got the impression that I thought the Big East was a great football conference. Reports were that the basketball coaches of Syracuse and Pitt were never asked about the move to the ACC. The athletic directors felt that the football money was too good to pass up, even though now two of the premier basketball schools in the Big East have to now face the gauntlet of ACC basketball. College sports used to be about more than just money (at least on the surface). It was about rivalries and geography. Texas and Texas A&M is now destroyed, one of the oldest rivalries in college. Kansas and Missouri is also gone. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris Clement on Jul 20, 2012 22:16:34 GMT -6
For years I've been saying that the Big East and ACC should merge and resplit into the Big Atlantic and East Coast, one would be for basketball schools, one for football.
|
|
|
|
Post by pmeisel on Jul 22, 2012 6:28:47 GMT -6
For the big guys, it's about the money. And when they tell you it's not about the money, that's when it's really only about the money.
For the rest -- well, there's less that 10,000 people every year involved in really competitive D-1-A football. At least 10 or 20 times that in all other college football.
I have quit watching the NBA, and now only watch a small handful of NCAA basketball teams. Didn't see KY all year and don't care to as long as they are doing the one and done thing.
Maybe one day NCAA football will get that bad, and I'll just go watch D3 games. But I hope not.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 22, 2012 10:06:07 GMT -6
For all of those lambasting the corporatism of the BCS level football programs, please don't be naive enough to think that lower levels are all pure and wholesome. There are still academic scandals, rogue athletes, and less than desirable occurrences in Div 1AA, Div 2, and Div 3. It just isn't as publicized or as well funded.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 22, 2012 10:12:38 GMT -6
For all of those lambasting the corporatism of the BCS level football programs, please don't be naive enough to think that lower levels are all pure and wholesome. There are still academic scandals, rogue athletes, and less than desirable occurrences in Div 1AA, Div 2, and Div 3. It just isn't as publicized or as well funded. When a kid at a 1A school gets in trouble he doesn't go home. He transfers to a lower level school. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 22, 2012 10:23:47 GMT -6
For all of those lambasting the corporatism of the BCS level football programs, please don't be naive enough to think that lower levels are all pure and wholesome. There are still academic scandals, rogue athletes, and less than desirable occurrences in Div 1AA, Div 2, and Div 3. It just isn't as publicized or as well funded. When a kid at a 1A school gets in trouble he doesn't go home. He transfers to a lower level school. A prime example. Are there SOME schools that truly have "student athletes" playing football/basketball. Sure. But I just don't want to see people thinking that while the SEC and BIG 10 schools are corrupt, Div 3 schools are uniformly pristine. Also, maybe it is just me, but I found the article to be extremely hypocritical, since Pat Forde is NOTHING without the big business of NCAA Div 1 athletics. As I said, the solution is pretty simple, but nobody wants it because of the unintended consequences. |
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 22, 2012 10:44:22 GMT -6
When a kid at a 1A school gets in trouble he doesn't go home. He transfers to a lower level school. A prime example. Are there SOME schools that truly have "student athletes" playing football/basketball. Sure. But I just don't want to see people thinking that while the SEC and BIG 10 schools are corrupt, Div 3 schools are uniformly pristine. Also, maybe it is just me, but I found the article to be extremely hypocritical, since Pat Forde is NOTHING without the big business of NCAA Div 1 athletics. As I said, the solution is pretty simple, but nobody wants it because of the unintended consequences. Just come out and say it. |
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 22, 2012 10:45:34 GMT -6
A prime example. Are there SOME schools that truly have "student athletes" playing football/basketball. Sure. But I just don't want to see people thinking that while the SEC and BIG 10 schools are corrupt, Div 3 schools are uniformly pristine. Also, maybe it is just me, but I found the article to be extremely hypocritical, since Pat Forde is NOTHING without the big business of NCAA Div 1 athletics. As I said, the solution is pretty simple, but nobody wants it because of the unintended consequences. Just come out and say it. Don't recruit/admit students who wouldn't otherwise attend college if not for football/basketball prowess. Obviously the devil is in the details, because as was mentioned earlier, admission standards are somewhat arbitrary. And lets face it, a college education has steadily been devalued over the last 25/30 years. But the bottom line--how many athletic scandals/issues have you heard about from M.I.T? Ivy league might have some issues, but the only one that jumps to my mind is actually a COACH scandal (resume' padding). But by the same token, Pat Forde is a NOTHING with NO CAREER if sports nationwide were run like M.I.T. That is what is so hypocritical about all of these sportswriters condemning the "big business" of college athletics. THEY DON'T HAVE JOBS without the big business of college athletics. |
|
|
|
Post by levy7853 on Jul 22, 2012 21:29:41 GMT -6
This is an interesting thread on a thought provoking article. It's always good to stretch the mind a little and consider the thoughts and opinions of others. I went to reply on two separate occasions and found that my posts were a bit long. I decided to use the article for a couple of blog posts. If you are interested in the long versions, they can be found on my website. The URL is in my profile and in my signature.
I struggle with these topics at times because I can often see, and relate to, the differing views.
Ultimately, however, I do not have a problem with the effects of big money and capitalism on football. I believe it has the potential to encourage a lot of good things to happen. Unfortunately, there is always the potential for people to take advantage of a situation and to turn it into something negative.
I do not view any of this as a football issue, or even as a sports issue. I believe it is ultimately a cultural issue with some elements of semantics.
As for eligibility and acceptance in universities, I believe athletes are talented in their own right and deserve an opportunity to go to a university and reap the benefits of the experience. I also believe the problem with the current university system, and education in general, is its primary point of emphasis. I do not believe an “education” is a process that begins and ends, but is a road to discovery and experience that should foster growth and an ability to use one’s talents to make the better place.
Thanks again for some food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by fantom on Jul 22, 2012 22:23:58 GMT -6
I think that it's too easy to say that the big money in 1A is the motivation for cheating. Sure it's a motivator for some but in any competitive endeavor there will be people who cheat just because they want to win. There's cheating going on at some D.3 schools (as well as non-scholarship 1AAs) in the form of very creative "need-based" financial aid. Schools have gotten in trouble for cheating at tennis. Hell, one school got caught bringing in ringers for a cheerleading competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by coachd5085 on Jul 22, 2012 23:31:46 GMT -6
I think that it's too easy to say that the big money in 1A is the motivation for cheating. Sure it's a motivator for some but in any competitive endeavor there will be people who cheat just because they want to win. I agree here, however, with the winning comes the $$$$ at this level in this sport. It kind of all becomes intertwined. Definitely agree though that is about the winning, as I stated earlier that lower levels are not all pristine. You touched on some of the things, such as private schools finding "leadership" scholarships and things of that nature. Division III is an interesting beast, as it has some of the more rigorous academic institutions as well as some schools with squads that would rival the Longest Yard's |
|
|
|
Post by jlenwood on Jul 23, 2012 11:57:42 GMT -6
How many people outside of Texas would know who TCU was if not for them being on bowl games every bowl season. Who would care about Butler University outside of their geographic area if it were not for the publicity that their Final Four appearances in basketball bring.
Of course big time college sports generate huge revenues, but isn't the bottom line to promote the school. So if TCU becomes a place where more and more NATIONWIDE students want to go because they heard of TCU from a bowl game, than long term Gary Patterson has done his job...he has made TCU a household name, familiar to potential students and parents, so he gets umpteen million a year.
It is no different than the Reds paying Joey Votto $200 million over 10 years, he fills seats. The more seats filled, the more the owners profit. The same applies to NCAA sports.
A great coach who is a proven winner deserves every dollar he can get. The idea of limiting him to a million dollars is ridiculous. As long as that coach is above board, make that money! If they are dishonest, than punishment deserved.
Now if you want to get into the absurdity of some of the NCAA regulations, that is a totally new thread on its own.
|
|
|
|
Post by irishdog on Jul 23, 2012 16:32:24 GMT -6
Put "scholar" back into the term "scholarship" and you will paint an entirely different picture of big-time college athletics.
|
|
