Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Events Cause Mariners To Lose To Rangers

Where does the NCAA go from here?

 

Ok, I’ve thought about this long and hard and I’ve come with this proposal for the NCAA: Start allowing kids to take money from schools, alums, agents, whomever they want. Allow as much money to be given to the kid as the kid can get. Allow the kid to continue to get money while in school.

Now immediately you say this is wrong. But, I ask why is it wrong? It is wrong because the NCAA says it is wrong. But, is there something inherently evil in getting paid to do something? Nope. In fact, getting paid to do things is how our whole society works.

Anyway, before you dismiss this idea, consider these points.

1. The whole idea of amateur athletics died a long time ago about the time the Olympics started allowing pro athletes to compete. These kids are making millions for their schools so why should they not reap some of the benefits?

2. The NCAA has not been able to stop the payment of student athletes. They have just forced people to be more creative, more under the table and even more involved with the criminal element. This needs to stop.

3. If it were out in the open then schools would have a fair chance to compete, or meet the offer of other schools. Right now a school trying to play fair as at a disadvantage to schools that cheat.

4. By making it legal you would end all this snooping around schools going against each other, calling the NCAA etc. All the schools going against each other, turning each other in etc., has created some bad blood.

5. A whole lot of kids in poverty could get their families out of the hood and into a better life. Right now even when a kid gets money he has to keep it on the down low. If it were legal a lot of poor folks could probably get home mortgages based on the money their kid is earning at college.

6. Kids would more likely stay for the full 4 years and who knows maybe even get a degree.

Now, if they were to make it legal I think all the money would need to be funneled directly through the athletic department so it is in public view. Boosters giving big bucks, say 200k, could give it to the athletic department and get a tax write off in the process as long as the money did not go towards their own kid. In fact giving a tax break would just about insure there was no more under the table money. And kids would need to pay taxes on the money too. I mean right now no one is paying taxes on this under the table stuff.

Actually, this whole idea would stimulate the economy and up the tax revenue all at the same time.

I know it is crazy but it would sure make things a lot easier. I think Bama would fair very well in this kind of environment. I mean we came up with the money to expand the stadium pretty easily and I think we could generally outbid most other schools, certainly we could outbid Auburn.

Alright, how do you feel about this idea?

FanPosts are just that; posts created by the fans. They are in no way indicative of the opinions of SBN and the authors of Roll Bama Roll.

Comment 127 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

It’ll up the tax revenue…. at the expense of the NCAA (who currently does not pay taxes). You’re opening the floodgates, and though the discussion needs to occur, it can’t happen within the realm of the NCAA. The very thing your proposing would require such an overhaul of the NCAA, that it’d be better to just disband and recreate a new entity.

You also open the door to advertisers on jerseys (which has been discussed before) and the capitalizing of an entity that belongs to the school. Now in most states, a school is considered the arm of the state, and the athletic department would have to be some form of publicly owned entity. This is so difficult for governments to get right, you might as well privatize the teams. This means that the team is legally not part of the school, but it can be written in contracts that team members receive a private scholarship to the school affiliated with the team.

Needless to say, you can keep rolling the snowball down the hill; the stadiums are built on college campuses, which are owned by the state, and would need consideration on whether the stadiums themselves should be privatized or if the state should get into the athletics business of letting these essentially professional teams play in the stadiums.

What your proposing may seem simple at first, but nearly every aspect of the game, aside from the actual playing of it, would need changed.

Books for Bama fans: My E-Cubby - UA

by squinky86 on Dec 2, 2010 4:28 PM CST reply actions  

One issue I see

I believe the NCAA is a not profit entity (for tax purposes) predicated on the basis of being an advocate of and facilitator of amateur athletics. If you take away that aspect of the nature of the entity, you open up a significant amount of tax issues. For example, the Service would not be happy with only income tax from the individuals recieving the compensation, but would also want income on contributions.

And if these monies are being funded to the athletic departments and then to students, then the not-profit status of the athletic department would come into question. Currently, I believe, the athletic department is afforded “protection” under the not-profit status of the University as a whole. I think the Service would have a big issue with the scenario and would salivate over getting the profits of a good deal of athletic departments out there…Ours being one.
Just food for thought…

Roll Tide!!

by touncy28 on Dec 2, 2010 10:19 PM CST up reply actions  

I think they should take away that tax exemption anyway,

but that’s a different story.

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 2, 2010 10:24 PM CST up reply actions  

To be honest

why is the athletic department tax exempt anyway?

I see them selling all sorts of jersey’s, photo’s etc. They should be paying income tax on that stuff just like any other business.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 11:33 AM CST up reply actions  

My opinion

Is that we shouldn’t pay taxes on income or wages at all. Any of us. But I digress…

"I have tried to teach them to show class, to have pride, and to display character. I think football, winning games, takes care of itself if you do that." -Paul W. Bryant

by JokerBama on Dec 3, 2010 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

come to texas.

all the taxes are in property and sales. where it should be. the government should only take money from what we knowingly decide to purchase, in my opinion.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 11:53 AM CST up reply actions  

True, but still have Federal though

Can’t get away from that. I lived in TX for a while, they make up for it in other ways, ha…

Taxes of all kinds (methods) have strangled us to no end. And will continue to, apparently.

"I have tried to teach them to show class, to have pride, and to display character. I think football, winning games, takes care of itself if you do that." -Paul W. Bryant

by JokerBama on Dec 3, 2010 12:02 PM CST up reply actions  

I know its being made up

I just like the feeling that I have more control (to some extent) over how much of my money is being taxed.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:07 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, it doesn't make any sense to me.

Their argument is that it’s all about the kids and their education, I think. BS basically.

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 12:08 PM CST up reply actions  

I think

the school boards and presidents would oppose this from the beginning. That would require a lot of money to pay all those athletes, and schools are having to cut their budgets these days.

by Chuck Finley on Dec 2, 2010 4:35 PM CST reply actions  

Good conversation starter . . .

. . . that generates lots of questions.

I think it would be a shame to do this because it would create a lot of divisions on the team between those getting paid a lot and those not. Players would have even less incentive to play for the honor of playing. I like the idea that a lot of our players go out there and bust their butts for 4 years for nothing other than the glory of playing for the University of Alabama. That would be undermined by a pay system.

Another question would come from the NFL: If they’re getting paid, why should we have to wait until their junior year to draft them?

by toofull on Dec 2, 2010 4:39 PM CST reply actions  

Didn’t the NFL institute that rule themselves?

by Chuck Finley on Dec 2, 2010 4:43 PM CST up reply actions  

This is a good idea

But only if you want the 120-team league to shrink to about 30 teams who could afford to pay players.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 4:42 PM CST reply actions  

Yeah

and what happens when the players decide to unionize? Bank on this, its not gonna hapen.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 4:44 PM CST up reply actions  

And they would in a real-quick-hurry, too.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 4:59 PM CST up reply actions  

cause

unionizing is bad when people attempt to capitalize on your labor?

by lbdasdog on Dec 2, 2010 7:50 PM CST up reply actions  

its bad for the business owners

lol.

In an industrial society which confuses work and productivity, the necessity of producing has always been an enemy of the desire to create. - Raoul Vaneigem

take this job and shove it - Johnny Paycheck

by tempebamafan on Dec 3, 2010 11:58 AM CST up reply actions  

And the workers,

and the consumers, and the economy,….

"I have tried to teach them to show class, to have pride, and to display character. I think football, winning games, takes care of itself if you do that." -Paul W. Bryant

by JokerBama on Dec 3, 2010 12:03 PM CST up reply actions  

yes...

If this happened, okie lite would become a powerhouse year in and year out.

"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant

by TopDaddy on Dec 2, 2010 4:45 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Or, a 3-8/7-5 team

could mysteriously land a top 3 recruiting class, including the number 1 Juco QB in the country.

hmmm….

"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon

by Stuck in the Plains on Dec 2, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions  

LMAO +1

(Disclaimer: This is The GTO Judge’s mobile posts so you are being warned of the following: The Judge can not spell and his grammar ain’t no good. In addition, these are the ramblings of a Lawyer/Rockstar/Crimson Tide fan with very little football knowledge outside of the SEC. One more thing, My Judge is Carousel Red not F’ing orange. I hate orange!)

by TheGTOJudge on Dec 2, 2010 10:54 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

I see what you did there.

Harrr.

" I imagine it is safe to assume that the Newton family has retained the services of a lawyer."-OTS

by UtahBammer on Dec 3, 2010 7:05 AM CST up reply actions  

not reap the benefits?

I don’t know about you, but I’m currently paying off about $40k in school loans. The benefit of being blessed with athletic ability is a free education. Call me old school, but that’s a hell of a benefit IMO.

"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant

by TopDaddy on Dec 2, 2010 4:43 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

Only if you have a use for it

Cost is not the same as value, and since you can’t sell your college education, it’s only worth what it gets you.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 5:00 PM CST up reply actions   3 recs

Just 40K?

Wanna’ trade?

"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon

by Stuck in the Plains on Dec 2, 2010 5:11 PM CST up reply actions  

hell no, lawya...

My company is paying for my masters but my wife is about to finish up, so I can tack on another $30k easy. Not as bad as some, but sure as hell not ideal.

"There's a lot of blood, sweat, and guts between dreams and success" - Coach Bryant

by TopDaddy on Dec 2, 2010 7:06 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

70k

between me and the wife. The sad thing is that our combined annual income does not equal our students loans. Moral of the story is don’t become an Environmental Scientist if your wife is a public school teacher…

by lbdasdog on Dec 2, 2010 7:54 PM CST up reply actions  

I would chop of my testicles for my income to match our loans

together (she’s a non-practicing but licensed atty) our debt load is $256,000.

Ugh. I just got sick looking at that.

"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon

by Stuck in the Plains on Dec 3, 2010 12:01 PM CST up reply actions  

I

just paid mine off October, 29 2010. That day will live in infamy. Mine were about $40k and I’m 30 years. Wife paid as she went. No debt other than my mortgage. Am I bragging about being in this position? Fuck and yes.

"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken

by Bens4vcobra on Dec 3, 2010 2:33 PM CST up reply actions  

*30 years old.

"A demagogue is one who preaches doctrines he knows to be untrue to men he knows to be idiots." -H. L. Mencken

by Bens4vcobra on Dec 3, 2010 2:35 PM CST up reply actions  

I know where you live...

grumble grumble grumble…

Good job.

grumble grumble grumble…

"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon

by Stuck in the Plains on Dec 3, 2010 3:02 PM CST up reply actions  

still won't change anything

The cheating and selling of the commitments will still continue. Everyone will get paid the same, so it will still be who will pay the most for the signature. I am not aganist paying them, but it will not eliminate the problem.

Baptman

by baptman on Dec 2, 2010 5:01 PM CST reply actions  

...but if paying is legal

…then it’s not cheating.

See?

We can eliminate all first degree murders by legalizing murder!

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 5:02 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Careful Pete, you might not like the result of that. LOL

(I’m not threatening you; I’m just speculating on others.)

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 2, 2010 5:17 PM CST up reply actions  

I come from Lake Titicaca!

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 2, 2010 10:15 PM CST up reply actions  

Where I come from, my people have no TP for their bunghole.

by Bumpjon on Dec 2, 2010 10:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Huh Huh shut up beavis

Woe that’s cool Huh Huh

I have seen the top o’ the mountain.

(Disclaimer: This is The GTO Judge’s mobile posts so you are being warned of the following: The Judge can not spell and his grammar ain’t no good. In addition, these are the ramblings of a Lawyer/Rockstar/Crimson Tide fan with very little football knowledge outside of the SEC. One more thing, My Judge is Carousel Red not F’ing orange. I hate orange!)

by TheGTOJudge on Dec 2, 2010 10:57 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

I wonder if that’s because they put it all on their trees.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 11:04 PM CST up reply actions   1 recs

Butthead is from Auburn

I get it NOW!!! It was right there out in the open this whole time… Duh.

"I have tried to teach them to show class, to have pride, and to display character. I think football, winning games, takes care of itself if you do that." -Paul W. Bryant

by JokerBama on Dec 3, 2010 8:44 AM CST up reply actions  

Do you really think

everyone will get paid the same? The under the table payments would most likely continue.

Have a Crimson Tide Day!
Roll Tide, Saban Tsunami Roll!

by IM4UAinVa on Dec 2, 2010 6:20 PM CST up reply actions  

Doubtful

Once you go this route, you start getting unions. You start taking payment under the table, someone is going to rat you out.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 6:24 PM CST up reply actions  

They

would find a way. Happens every day.

Have a Crimson Tide Day!
Roll Tide, Saban Tsunami Roll!

by IM4UAinVa on Dec 2, 2010 6:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Is that the case?

How many NFL players get under-the-table money in violation of NFLPA contracts?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 6:56 PM CST up reply actions  

I'm sorry

I thought we were speaking of schools. Some of which have money and some which do not. Those that have money will sweeten the pot somehow or another, while those that do not (have money) can not. And are you saying all NFL players are paid the same? the statement was “Everyone will get paid the same”. That is what I was referring to. Now, you want to go from educational institutions to Professional sports teams and I don’t think that’s a fair comparison. And Pete, I don’t want to get into a battle of wits with you, because I am unarmed. So let’s keep this in this solar system, ok,

Have a Crimson Tide Day!
Roll Tide, Saban Tsunami Roll!

by IM4UAinVa on Dec 2, 2010 7:22 PM CST up reply actions  

We’re talking about schools that can now legally pay players, and if that was regulated by some sort of players union (and it would be… the only question is whether that union would negotiate with the NCAA or with individual schools), it wouldn’t matter whether they were all supposed to be payed the same amount or if the amounts were tiered, or what. That contract would be enforce viciously by folks paid to do so, and with the full force of the civil courts — something the NCAA can’t really do.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 11:07 PM CST up reply actions  

Everybody paid the same?

Fuck that!

'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban

by J Tadpole on Dec 2, 2010 7:16 PM CST up reply actions  

+999999 love that pic.

That is one of Awbarn’s finest cheerleaders too. Scam has all the luck.

(Disclaimer: This is The GTO Judge’s mobile posts so you are being warned of the following: The Judge can not spell and his grammar ain’t no good. In addition, these are the ramblings of a Lawyer/Rockstar/Crimson Tide fan with very little football knowledge outside of the SEC. One more thing, My Judge is Carousel Red not F’ing orange. I hate orange!)

by TheGTOJudge on Dec 2, 2010 11:00 PM CST via mobile up reply actions  

Is that a cash cow?

"We knew we had to turn it up or we would get beat. We ripped the knob off. We turned it up so much we broke the knob." - Roy Upchurch after beating Florida in the 2009 SEC Championship Game

by bearbryantwonit on Dec 3, 2010 9:42 AM CST up reply actions   1 recs

+200k!!

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 9:53 AM CST up reply actions  

Another thing to consider

The schools that would really benefit from this would have the wealthiest alumni. So if you are looking to make the Ivy League a super power, this is the way to do it. Granted, the kids would have to make the grades to get in, but believe me, they could outspend us in a second. Same is true of Notre Dame, they would instantly be a front runner as they have an extremely wealthy alumni base that is passionate about football. A lot of kids could easily overlook the Catholic thing for $1 million bucks.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 5:08 PM CST reply actions  

I'm not entirely sure that's true

Having the money and being willing to donate it to the football program are two different things.

It’s already at the point where producing a lot of wealth can all but buy you a good program in 5 years if you’re willing to invest it.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 5:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Maybe, maybe not

But if you think about it, all it would take is one zealous hedge fund manager that went to Havard, Yale, Princeton, etc. It wouldn’t necessarily be an overnight thing, but ultimately, outside of being a Saudi sheik, being a hedgefund manager in New York is about as big as it gets financially.

Also, people would look at from this angle, where do you get kids that can qualify at these universitie?. For example, I picked Rick Dobbs at the Naval Academy. Ricky would be able to qualify at any Ivy League institution, however, he wanted to contribute to our national defense, which is a credit to him. You need look no further than GMac for that matter, he could easily qualify, and would go there if they were playing at the highest level. My point is, there are enough quality guys that could both compete at a high atheletic level and qualify on the academic level which could make them formidble. Additionally, if this were to occur, unless we got a booster from Saudi Arabia, it would difficult for us to financially compete against them head to head.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 5:44 PM CST up reply actions  

Do Ivy League grads really make the most money?

I am not so sure that they would out raise Bama in football. If they could, wouldn’t they be doing it now?

Roll Tide!

by mobilematt12 on Dec 2, 2010 5:59 PM CST up reply actions  

should say

if they wanted to, wouldn’t they be doing it now? To answer my own question ,the Ivys are all in the top 25 of average salaries.

Roll Tide!

by mobilematt12 on Dec 2, 2010 6:09 PM CST up reply actions  

What I mean is

Under the new circumstances, in which players could be paid, they would have the most to spend if they choose to. Right now, its sort of moot.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 6:18 PM CST up reply actions  

It's not moot at all

The “brand” isn’t as important as you think it is. It’s a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Right now, lots of money can buy you everything but the players, including the staff members required to get the players.

It wouldn’t take much of Warren Buffet’s money to create a program that would compete year-in and year-out with the heavy-weights in half a decade.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 6:26 PM CST up reply actions  

I was saying its moot

in regard to the Ivy League as it currently exists, and the level in which the compete.

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 6:30 PM CST up reply actions  

But they're at that level by choice

If they put the money into it, they could be D-I pretty easily.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 6:48 PM CST up reply actions  

No question

and if you add to it being able to pay players, they would have the option of being the New York Yankees of football

by BamaThrasher on Dec 2, 2010 6:53 PM CST up reply actions  

My point is that that’s already an option. Since they can pay the players the same amount that any other team can pay them, it comes down to other factors, and if it is indeed the case that the Ivies have boatloads of cash they’re just itching to spend on college football, they’d already be building bigger stadia, hiring better coaches, and going the D-I route.

Oklahoma State? Yeah, they’d be bankrolling tons of players.

Harvard? Doubtful.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 6:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Ivy's don't offer football schollies.

"Imagination was given to man to compensate him for what he is not; a sense of humor to console him for what he is." -Sir Francis Bacon

by Stuck in the Plains on Dec 2, 2010 6:33 PM CST up reply actions  

They didn't get to be that wealthy (Ivy leagers) by prioritizing amatuer sports...

Pretty sure this wouldn’t be too much of a factor. There’s nothing stopping them now from giving to football programs now. It’s a huge cultural difference. These people are running our national institutions, football isn’t on their minds quite like the people from state universities of the south.

Sports are a culture's way of getting at 5 or 6 great men... and then assuring that their greatness remains petty.

by zarahoopstra on Dec 2, 2010 7:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Losers.

The Ivies I mean, of course. ;)

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 2, 2010 10:21 PM CST up reply actions  

Would the Ivy League even opt into such a program?

Remember, they don’t even offer scholarships currently. And it’s not because they couldn’t afford to.

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 2, 2010 10:18 PM CST up reply actions  

Think of Title 9 lawsuits lodged by the law school's

bored 3Ls. It would be hell, given the current jurisprudence on Title 9. Do you really want to expose the football team (i.e. something important) to a federal injunction days before the IB? The Fed judge wouldn’t care, and sadly probably not understand, how important the game is; he would look at the actual discriminatory impact on the womyn’s netball team, who would probably get a case of Tab and wine coolers for a season.

Nice idea in theory, but bad consequences

"I'm champagne and you're shit." - Jon Lovitz in Happiness

by sho' I stole on Dec 2, 2010 7:48 PM CST reply actions  

Nah

Simple solution: the school doesn’t pay a dime, and all player salaries are funded by boosters.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 11:08 PM CST up reply actions  

Yes, let the boosters come up with the $

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 11:35 AM CST up reply actions  

I know you all think it would

be unfair, but it is already unfair. If MSU had the money they would have a NC.

It doesn ‘t mean small schools would go out of business etc. They’d have about the same chance as they have now.

And I know it won’t happen, but it would be as good a system as we have now. Let’s be honest there is no way the NCAA can police what we have going on now. If schools won’t self penalize, and most won’t, it is going to get even worse. If you make it all legal, run it through the school, then at least we have a level of everyone playing by the rules.

And under the table money doesn’t make sense in this system. You can just pay them straight up why put it under the table?

And, do most of these kids really play for the school just because they love the school? I seriously doubt it. They may grow to love the school, but most play because it was the best deal for them when they were recruited.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 2, 2010 10:10 PM CST reply actions  

If MSU had the money they would have a NC.

Wait, what? You think MSU couldn’t find $200k?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 2, 2010 11:08 PM CST up reply actions  

Ok, this is a vast assumption

but the point is the “small” schools aren’t on an even footing right now in recruiting so what would change?

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 11:36 AM CST up reply actions  

They would go from being “at a disadvantage” to being “completely unable to compete.”

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 12:28 PM CST up reply actions  

Not so.

Say a small school only had about 300k to pay all their players. They have to find that diamond in the rough, that game changer that no one can see, and put all their eggs in that basket. Coming out of JuCo, Cam was only 4 stars. You could have bought him for 300k and then look at the benefit you would reap.

It is sort of like baseball where the small market teams have to go up against the Yankees and the Dodgers. They are at a disadvantage, but teams like the Marlins still find a way to compete.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 1:12 PM CST up reply actions  

So if you put Cam on Georgia State’s team, all of a sudden they’re winning championships?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 1:14 PM CST up reply actions  

Not a fan of allowing schools to pay.....

but I have no problem with allowing players to accept money from agents, accept endorsement deals, appear in ads. Olympic athletes have been making money through advertising and endorsment deals for years (Wheaties Boxes, anyone?) while still maintaining “amateur” status. If an agent wants to pay a player for possible future profits they are only risking their own money.

by d1j2d on Dec 2, 2010 10:30 PM CST reply actions  

It looks like a common sense solution on the surface but...

If you start paying these athletes you essentially create another NFL division. Why is it that most of us prefer college to NFL? Its because your not watching spoiled rich men with nothing to lose tackle one another. College players show more heart and emotion because they are playing for a chance to take the field in an NFL uniform. If you pay them then you sap that element out of the game. Don’t get me wrong I love NFL football, but college football has something that NFL doesn’t.

My Mama says that alligators are ornery because they got all them teeth and no toothbrush.

by J.JACOBS4PRES on Dec 2, 2010 10:40 PM CST reply actions   1 recs

One thing college has

is schools acsuing each other of cheating. I don’t see that in the NFL.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 11:38 AM CST up reply actions  

Have you forgotten about Spygate?

by Bumpjon on Dec 3, 2010 11:53 AM CST up reply actions  

A Minor

deal compared to UT setting up Bama with Albert Means.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 12:14 PM CST up reply actions  

yeah. that sucked.

if you gave a bama fan a gun with one bullet, put phil fulmer and osama bin laden in front of him…most would probably chose phillip.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:20 PM CST up reply actions  

Ok so by saying it doesn’t happen you just mean doesn’t happen as much or to the same extent?

by Bumpjon on Dec 3, 2010 1:33 PM CST up reply actions  

I prefer college to NFL because Alabama doesn’t play in the NFL.

by zeke2029 on Dec 3, 2010 11:58 AM CST up reply actions  

My take for what it is worth

I am dead set against paying players. An education is worth a hell of a lot. Ask Prothro if his education didn’t help him. Every super star is one injury away from being nothing without their education.

Next if we are paying players will there be trades. One thing I love about CFB is that the players I root for are unlikely to be at my rival’s school next year. I would be so pissed to see ingram at the Barn because they out bid us.

Next point, players will become million dollar babies, just like the NFL. Coach benches you, so what, I still made my signing bonus and my salary screw you coach. I know the arguement that will be made. That makes the player look bad for the NFL but if teams are willing to put up with Vicks, TO’s, and other jerk players what do they care.

However, yes I can see the slippery slope argument, I think the kids could get benifits. An alum should be able to take a player to dinner, or go on a fishing trip. There needs to be a diminimus amount a kid can get. Coach I need shoes or a shirt or just some spending money. Coach Bryant use to do that for his players when it wasn’t a violation. Coach Bryant despised having to pay players to recruit them because he wanted the kid to come because of the university not the money but back then you had to pay to keep up with schools who were paying to recruit players like Notre Dame. Remember when they were a powerhouse.

I could go on but I have ranted enough.

(Disclaimer: This is The GTO Judge’s mobile posts so you are being warned of the following: The Judge can not spell and his grammar ain’t no good. In addition, these are the ramblings of a Lawyer/Rockstar/Crimson Tide fan with very little football knowledge outside of the SEC. One more thing, My Judge is Carousel Red not F’ing orange. I hate orange!)

by TheGTOJudge on Dec 2, 2010 11:22 PM CST via mobile reply actions  

Cost != Worth

What a thing is worth varies based on the person.

A college education might be worth a hell of a lot to you. If you want to dig ditches for the rest of your life, probably not so much.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 9:39 AM CST up reply actions  

Dammmit, why did I go get this engineering degree when all I really wanted to do was dig ditches?!!

They won’t even let me touch a shovel here!! :(

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 9:54 AM CST up reply actions  

NO

www.FitnessYourWay.wordpress.com

by bammer on Dec 3, 2010 8:37 AM CST reply actions  

Wow,, looks like the NCAA

has stepped on their collective scrotum….again. All this big talk of “zero-tolerance”….bullshit. Reeks of cash-grab damage control. But, then again, what do I know.

"...because you've got your mind right, and that's the way we like it." Nick Saban

by SRGBama on Dec 3, 2010 8:43 AM CST reply actions  

Cash-grab?

…what profit is the NCAA making on this?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 9:38 AM CST up reply actions  

considering that auburn is an SEC championship participant

plus possibly a BCS NCG participant, plus an auburn fanbase….

id say a pretty decent amount of money.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:05 PM CST up reply actions  

For the NCAA?

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 12:10 PM CST up reply actions  

Probably not directly

But id would be in the best interest of the NCAA to have “the best team” and the “the best player” in CFB to be in those games. More people watch, more people buy auburn stuff, more people do things associated with “NCAA”.

The NCAA is a direct benefeciary of all those things.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:14 PM CST up reply actions  

The NCAA does not profit from the BCS

There’s no financial motive for the NCAA to act in one way or another w/r/t Cam, except

The NCAA’s tax-exempt status is predicated on amateurism. If they start giving off vibes of being cool with “professional” sorts of arrangements, Congress could start asking questions.

So if anything, the NCAA has a strong financial incentive to nail anyone to the wall who so much as sniffs an agent improperly.

Which is all the more reason to believe that if the NCAA hasn’t acted yet, it’s not because they’re dragging their feet — it’s because they lack the necessary evidence to move forward.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 12:31 PM CST up reply actions  

they do profit from all those things i posted at 10:14

You have a good point, but possibly the NCAA thinks more money is to be made protecting cam newton than any other venture.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:43 PM CST up reply actions  

I don’t think so.

Trace the money from me. I’m a consumer… how does money get into the NCAA’s pocket by way of the BCS?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 12:45 PM CST up reply actions  

Actually, nevermind.

I’m going to short-circuit this with some actual numbers:

Nearly ~90% of the NCAA’s revenue comes from TV agreements for their championship events (i.e., March Madness). The remainder comes from investments and actual money made at the championship events themselves.

Source.

So, yeah. What you’re saying is interesting in theory, but it is not accurate.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 12:53 PM CST up reply actions  

i know that most of the NCAAs tv rights come from the bball tourney

all im saying is that more people will watch if auburn/cam is in it. Its the SEC. the NCAA probably wants the SEC in the NCG. That means more money from licensing and marketing rights fees (another source of revenue).

Just because the revenue sheets dont have “auburn” listed as a source of income doesnt mean it isnt.

Now, im not one to theorize on conspiracies. All im saying is i can see how something like this could happen. Doesnt mean i think it is.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:59 PM CST up reply actions  

No, look, I think you misunderstand. I’m not saying “Auburn’s not listed”, I’m saying: read the budgets. The money is not coming from football.

The NCAA does not make money from BCS television agreements. 85% of their money comes from the CBS March Madness competition. The other 5% likely comes from things like Gymnastics.

The NCAA doesn’t receive licensing fees on behalf of member institutions (check the revenue budget), the licensing company does.

The problem here is that you are assuming a factual scenario — NCAA profit from the BCS — that doesn’t exist.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 1:04 PM CST up reply actions  

The NCAA doesn’t receive licensing fees on behalf of member institutions (check the revenue budget), the licensing company does.

The licensing company and the member institutions.

You could make an argument that the NCAA IS the member institutions, but it’d be pretty roundabout and Pete would have a field day with it.

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions  

Well, yeah, the licensing fees are collected on behalf of the member institutions by the licensing company, and while the NCAA comprises its member institutions, their money is not the NCAA’s money.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 4:33 PM CST up reply actions  

Yeah, god forbid they actually follow the rules and not what some people wish the rule was.

by Bumpjon on Dec 3, 2010 9:39 AM CST up reply actions  

Im kind of surprised that we havent seen a real article from

RBR on this whole NCAA ruling yet…

Im not mad or anything, just find it odd.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 12:41 PM CST reply actions  

touche sir.

like i said, im not mad. just curious. I dont know what peoples schedules are or what. just curious.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 1:00 PM CST up reply actions  

I’m just not sure what you think there is to write about.

This whole thing, to me, seems like much ado about nothing.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 1:06 PM CST up reply actions  

One of the main characters

in Much Ado About Nothing is Claudio, and his name means “lame” which is a good desciption of the NCAA on this situation.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 1:19 PM CST up reply actions  

Why do you say that?

What rule has the NCAA failed to enforce?

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 1:48 PM CST up reply actions  

Calling someone "lame"

is not an objective statement it is a subjective statement. As such it is perfectly legit for me to say that the way the NCAA handled Camgate was and is lame. I don’t have to prove it.

By the way I am joined in this opinion by the commissioners of the Big 10 and Pac 10 as well as the AD at USC.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 3:32 PM CST up reply actions  

By the way I am joined in this opinion by the commissioners of the Big 10 and Pac 10 as well as the AD at USC.

Well the B10 and P10 certainly don’t have anything to gain by Awbarn going down and do we really want to believe anything that comes out of the the AD of “we still haven’t done anything wrong” USC regarding the rules?

by Bumpjon on Dec 3, 2010 4:31 PM CST up reply actions  

I didn’t ask you to prove they were lame, I asked you to support your opinion.

You don’t have to, obviously, but it just being an opinion doesn’t make it less ridiculous.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 4:34 PM CST up reply actions  

Hey your the one that started the Much Ado About Nothing

reference. I just said that Claudio’s name meant “lame.”

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 3, 2010 8:37 PM CST up reply actions  

I dont live in alabama. I use this site as one of my main, go-to places for news

and insight on some of the goings-on relative to alabama. I was just surprised that the original fanpost wasnt bumped to the main page, or there wasnt some kind of comment on it even if its just saying its much ado about nothing. Most of the news concerning the cam situation has been discussed on here, so im a little surprised that one of the biggest things to happen to that case has been ignored on the main page. Now, of course there are reasons for this, just wondering if there was something i missed or what.

by Mr. Abe Froman on Dec 3, 2010 1:32 PM CST up reply actions  

Wait, you come here for factual information!?!

I was told to stop stating facts and correcting other people’s misstatement of the facts because people just want rumor, innuendo, and opinion.

by Bumpjon on Dec 3, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions  

That’s maybe the disconnect: I don’t see this particular piece of information is being particularly interesting.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 1:49 PM CST up reply actions  

Maybe not, but it's being taken as EXTREMELY interesting by most of the national media

and as damn near definitive by the Aubies. (I’m not saying either of those is right, but it seems to be perception.)

I’m with TNT in that when it first broke, I assumed that the Fanpost would be supplanted by a main page post at some point.

If I'm wearing a turban, it means Auburn is playing Iraq.

by CarrotTop4 on Dec 3, 2010 4:04 PM CST up reply actions  

Well, it’s being sensationalized by them and folks are lapping it up, so they’re going to keep doing that until they can’t any more.

I'm wrong all the time.

by PeteHoliday on Dec 3, 2010 4:35 PM CST up reply actions  

SEC bias

I was just looking at espn’s site and couldn’t help but notice the abundance of posts about the NCAA’s favoring the SEC and this being the reason for their soft treatment of the Newton situation. I am relatively new to rbr and never posted before, but was wondering if those of you in the know could refute this theory in light of Bama’s and other SEC school’s sanctions in recent years. Thanks.

by TideZone on Dec 5, 2010 6:09 PM CST reply actions  

They’re being “soft” on Cam because neither he nor the Barn violated any rules.

by Bumpjon on Dec 5, 2010 6:29 PM CST up reply actions  

That we know of.

If Auburn was in New Mexico and we never played them I would still hate them and their dumb coach and their cheating players.

by 5026 on Dec 5, 2010 8:24 PM CST up reply actions  

Well yeah. But with out starting this whole argument up again, I just state that the NCAA can only punish folks for rule violations that they know of.

by Bumpjon on Dec 5, 2010 8:41 PM CST up reply actions  

Aw, c’mon…

'There are two pains in life. There is the pain of discipline and the pain of disappointment. If you can handle the pain of discipline, then you'll never have to deal with the pain of disappointment,'- Nick Saban

by J Tadpole on Dec 5, 2010 8:58 PM CST up reply actions  

Well if you really want me too, just say something incredibly stupid.

by Bumpjon on Dec 5, 2010 9:16 PM CST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog covering the Alabama Crimson Tide.

FanPosts

Roll Bama Roll on Twitter


Managers

Disreputable_small Todd

Miltonf-788904_small outsidethesidelines

Kyp2_small Nico2.0

Editors

Kleph_logo_copy_small kleph

Green_small Matt Dover