The End Of The "Student Athlete"

redmanwest

redmanwest

Well-known member
2023 $upporter 2022 $upporter
Just my opinion and assuredly a minority view, but there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old system of student athlete amateur college sports (in return for the tuition, board and perks that came with it).

The courts have screwed the pooch, and created out of whole cloth a system that is not sustainable, and where ultimately only a few will be able to compete long-term.

I think that ultimately, the major of college programs (in many sports) are becoming in effect minor leagues for the truly professional leagues, and eventually the majority of schools and conferences will be forced to revert to a system that is akin to current Division 3 which is basically voluntary participation on sport for sport sake.

Kids good enough to play semi-pro (big time college sports) will probably be unionized and made employees of the schools in a bifurcated system, and there ends the charm and attraction for many of what used to be a great thing.

The rules as they are evolving are indeed arbitrary and ridiculous pretenses. If these kids are to paid professionals, why are there any qualification rules or requirements? Why is there any limitation on the number of years of participation? Why are there any requirements to attend class and achieve minimum standard academic achievement? Either S$%^ or get off the pot.
 
redmanwest said:
Just my opinion and assuredly a minority view, but there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old system of student athlete amateur college sports (in return for the tuition, board and perks that came with it).

The courts have screwed the pooch, and created out of whole cloth a system that is not sustainable, and where ultimately only a few will be able to compete long-term.

I think that ultimately, the major of college programs (in many sports) are becoming in effect minor leagues for the truly professional leagues, and eventually the majority of schools and conferences will be forced to revert to a system that is akin to current Division 3 which is basically voluntary participation on sport for sport sake.

Kids good enough to play semi-pro (big time college sports) will probably be unionized and made employees of the schools in a bifurcated system, and there ends the charm and attraction for many of what used to be a great thing.

The rules as they are evolving are indeed arbitrary and ridiculous pretenses. If these kids are to paid professionals, why are there any qualification rules or requirements? Why is there any limitation on the number of years of participation? Why are there any requirements to attend class and achieve minimum standard academic achievement? Either S$%^ or get off the pot.
Click to expand...

Agree, there was nothing wrong with the old system. These “poor” kids were getting a free college education, room and board something that most families had to save a lifetime to give to their kids. But as we can see now, greed has set in and the hangers on are making it worse and capitalizing on it. But as we have seen before and will ultimately transpire, greed based existence is not sustainable and college sports will ultimately meet their demise and no one will shed a tear.
 
paultzman said:
Recent Baker/NCAA decision on compensating players w additional time, who were not cleared at some point and lost time, are steeped in avoiding further law suits. The system overall can’t be sustained in current form.
Click to expand...
That + showing "good will" to Congress so they get the antitrust exemption so they can then govern the sport.
 
Silly Donovan said:
Agree, there was nothing wrong with the old system. These “poor” kids were getting a free college education, room and board something that most families had to save a lifetime to give to their kids. But as we can see now, greed has set in and the hangers on are making it worse and capitalizing on it. But as we have seen before and will ultimately transpire, greed based existence is not sustainable and college sports will ultimately meet their demise and no one will shed a tear.
Click to expand...
Says the the greedy crybaby who is upset that "poor" kids are being now being paid what is obviously market rate for their services. If the systems was perfect before it would not have changed. Only individuals like yourself fail to recognize when the market corrects itself. Boo hoo, I cry for these universities for having to share in the millions and billions they have made for decades!
 
Money said:
Says the the greedy crybaby who is upset that "poor" kids are being now being paid what is obviously market rate for their services. If the systems was perfect before it would not have changed. Only individuals like yourself fail to recognize when the market corrects itself. Boo hoo, I cry for these universities for having to share in the millions and billions they have made for decades!
Click to expand...

If you are going to post a criticism of something I’ve posted, try doing it in an intelligent way, not your usual incoherent style. Crybaby? Not really, I just sympathize for those hard working families who sacrificed to put their children, actual students, not paid athletes through school. Market value, decided by the greed of many including the athletic departments.

Not surprising coming from someone whose tag is “money”, I’m sure you have your lame priorities straight.
 
Maybe the NIL funds should be held and distributed after graduation.
 
As with most things I think that nuance gets lost in the shouting from the extremes of the polarized views.

There are definitely students at all levels who benefited from the student-athlete / scholarship model.

There are also definitely students for whom the scholarship model was patently inadequate compensation for the value they delivered to colleges and universities (who along with many others) profited handsomely on their backs by virtue of running a near-monopoly system. And that model also clearly restricted opportunities the players should have had in furtherance of perpetuating the monopoly and the profits.

Now that the chickens have at long last come home to roost, it is hugely disruptive to sports at the Division 1 level. It will continue to be hugely disruptive for some time. Eventually the new normal will either be successful or it won't - maybe it will be unsuccessful for those who are older and tied to what they see as the benefits of the old way and it will be successful for younger folks who aren't hampered by those memories and have a stronger sense of equity. I don't know.

But I don't think it is accurate to say definitively that one way or the other was "better." It's just different, and presents different costs and benefits across a range of considerations. Life is messy that way - although it's much easier not to bother with any of that and just work in black and white.
 
lawmanfan said:
As with most things I think that nuance gets lost in the shouting from the extremes of the polarized views.

There are definitely students at all levels who benefited from the student-athlete / scholarship model.

There are also definitely students for whom the scholarship model was patently inadequate compensation for the value they delivered to colleges and universities (who along with many others) profited handsomely on their backs by virtue of running a near-monopoly system. And that model also clearly restricted opportunities the players should have had in furtherance of perpetuating the monopoly and the profits.

Now that the chickens have at long last come home to roost, it is hugely disruptive to sports at the Division 1 level. It will continue to be hugely disruptive for some time. Eventually the new normal will either be successful or it won't - maybe it will be unsuccessful for those who are older and tied to what they see as the benefits of the old way and it will be successful for younger folks who aren't hampered by those memories and have a stronger sense of equity. I don't know.

But I don't think it is accurate to say definitively that one way or the other was "better." It's just different, and presents different costs and benefits across a range of considerations. Life is messy that way - although it's much easier not to bother with any of that and just work in black and white.
Click to expand...
🔥
 
Silly Donovan said:
If you are going to post a criticism of something I’ve posted, try doing it in an intelligent way, not your usual incoherent style. Crybaby? Not really, I just sympathize for those hard working families who sacrificed to put their children, actual students, not paid athletes through school. Market value, decided by the greed of many including the athletic departments.

Not surprising coming from someone whose tag is “money”, I’m sure you have your lame priorities straight.
Click to expand...
Trying to find where you disagree with my criticism of you being a crybaby. Your post was directed at the "poor" kids who were already banking off the system with free education, room and board and free lollipops. Now you're directing the greed at the athletic departments? Trying to follow your logic (I know its a slippery road), so the "poor" kids are greedy for wanting to share in the billions of revenue that the greedy athletic departments have been pocketing for decades?

Oh yeah... thank goodness you brought up the sympathy for those hard working families!! They have surely benefitted from the millions these Universities have pocketed (which were not shared with those "poor" kids), surely those dollars were used to make higher education so much more affordable, right???
 
I will be 54 next week and unfortunately/fortunately things change during our lifetimes. Sometimes for better, sometimes for worse and sometimes for both.

I miss the 80's but they aren't coming back but my kids graduate college next year. It is what it is.
 
redmanwest said:
Just my opinion and assuredly a minority view, but there was absolutely nothing wrong with the old system of student athlete amateur college sports (in return for the tuition, board and perks that came with it).
Click to expand...
the roots of the problem, as I see it, was that, the "perks that came with it," did not include the athlete getting any spending money in their pocket because they were much busier than other students on campus who could hold on to part time jobs. The NCAA did not allow any further stipend be given to the athletes, other than a scholarship. Then, when an entity attempted to greedily misappropriated-- to profit on-- the likeness and image of O'Bannon, that was rightfully inexcusable and has propelled the system into a shell of its former self.
 
The problem I continue to have with all of this is that NIL was set up so that kids could profit off of their name, image and likeness. They could now be paid to appear in ads, sponsor posts, marketing campaigns, sell jerseys with their name on it, etc. Somehow NIL immediately evolved into 3rd party collectives being able to pay kids directly with no strings attached and certainly nothing to do with any of the NIL items listed above.
 
There is no reason to keep up the charade that these are students. If they want to go to class and get a degree, great. If not, they are employees of the school that shoot hoops.
 
Mullins Revenge said:
There is no reason to keep up the charade that these are students. If they want to go to class and get a degree, great. If not, they are employees of the school that shoot hoops.
Click to expand...
Do you think the kids who shoot hoops for Princeton are students? What about the kids at Hofstra? Siena? Delaware?

What about the back quarter of the bench at Big East schools? Tareq Coburn?

And if we just call them "employees of the school" what consequences flow from that?

Easy to sit on your couch with a cold one and spout off on the internet. Harder to deal with the actual situation in a thoughtful way.
 
lawmanfan said:
Do you think the kids who shoot hoops for Princeton are students? What about the kids at Hofstra? Siena? Delaware?

What about the back quarter of the bench at Big East schools? Tareq Coburn?

And if we just call them "employees of the school" what consequences flow from that?

Easy to sit on your couch with a cold one and spout off on the internet. Harder to deal with the actual situation in a thoughtful way.
Click to expand...
But then he wouldn’t be Mullins Revenge 🤣
 
Agreed the entire system is a mess,we have Cormac Ryan who was like 25 playing in the final four, played 1 year Stanford, sat out a year for old school transfer rules, then 4 years at Notre Dame, then a graduate year 6 at North Carolina… crazy.. the lack of sitting out 1 year has also created a situation where a kid plays well in the MAAC then transfers up to the Big East, hell players in the old days I think had to sit out 2 years to transfer to another Big East school.

There needs to be a salary cap ot regulation of some sort it’s the Wild West .
 
Money said:
Says the the greedy crybaby who is upset that "poor" kids are being now being paid what is obviously market rate for their services. If the systems was perfect before it would not have changed. Only individuals like yourself fail to recognize when the market corrects itself. Boo hoo, I cry for these universities for having to share in the millions and billions they have made for decades!
Click to expand...
The Universities bring the overwhelming value to this equation. If you had asked any of these kids if room, board, tuition and $25K-$35K per year was a good deal they would have jumped at it…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top