Transfer article

[muwarrior69]

The tennis and golfers scored 1200 or better on their SATs?   I kid, I kid.

By the way, the tennis and golfers play an individual sport, where they drive their own ticket.  Personally, I love the golfing & tennis rewards concept.  You make money in golf by actually performing.  No contracts...you perform if you want to get paid.  You slump in hoops, baseball, etc, you still get paid.  You slump in golf, back to Q school.  Wish all sports was that way.  All we have to do is go to the link I provided earlier today of the top recruiting classes by years and see those that made it and those that completely bombed....yet with your argument you are going to say all those top recruits are worth tons of money based on what they did in high school.  No thanks.

Agree! Can you imagine how exciting baseball would be if salaries were capped at 500,000. If you make the post season you get an additional million; make the world series an additional 5 million; win it all 100 million.

[GGGG]

It's not a free market at his age, nor should it be.  We have age restrictions all over the place in this country.  Age for consent, age to get married, age to be employed, age to buy liquor, vote, join the military...and even be eligible for certain professional sports leagues.

What if the guy down the street for me was just an awesome sniper, could hit an eye out of a bird at 1500 yards without a sweat but he was 15...should the Army be allowed to take him?  He's worth something to the Army, he's got skilllllzzzzz. 

This has got to be one of the more absurd arguments I have read.

This has nothing to do with an age based restriction.  It has to do with a system whereby a cartel can dictate the terms of the contract arrangement. 

[brandx]

Agree! Can you imagine how exciting baseball would be if salaries were capped at 500,000. If you make the post season you get an additional million; make the world series an additional 5 million; win it all 100 million.

I know for a fact that Jordan or Montana never really tried that hard because their salaries weren't capped and they had all of the money they needed.

One of the greatest sports myths - that athletes don't try hard when they have made big $$$

[brandx]

The tennis and golfers scored 1200 or better on their SATs?   I kid, I kid.

By the way, the tennis and golfers play an individual sport, where they drive their own ticket.  Personally, I love the golfing & tennis rewards concept.  You make money in golf by actually performing.  No contracts...you perform if you want to get paid.  You slump in hoops, baseball, etc, you still get paid.  You slump in golf, back to Q school.  Wish all sports was that way.  All we have to do is go to the link I provided earlier today of the top recruiting classes by years and see those that made it and those that completely bombed....yet with your argument you are going to say all those top recruits are worth tons of money based on what they did in high school.  No thanks.

Don't totally agree, Chicos. If a golfer or tennis player has been successful - he will still get paid even if he slumps - just like a baseball or basketball player would. All successful athletes in individual sports have endorsement contracts and many also command appearance fees.

Now if the slump continues for several years, they are out of luck, but so are athletes in team sports. They will either be cut or not re-signed.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Don't totally agree, Chicos. If a golfer or tennis player has been successful - he will still get paid even if he slumps - just like a baseball or basketball player would. All successful athletes in individual sports have endorsement contracts and many also command appearance fees.

Now if the slump continues for several years, they are out of luck, but so are athletes in team sports. They will either be cut or not re-signed.

I acknowledged that, but to get those endorsements they typically have to be good in the first place...typically.  If they slump, they won't be earning much in the way of prize money if they fail to make the cut or get knocked out in the first round or two in tennis.  They'll get something, but not the big paydays.  The point with tennis and golf is usually you have to earn your way there and continue to earn your way.  Its not like the team sports where you can cash in big time with guaranteed contracts that don't penalize you for sucking it up.

How often do we see team sports players come back to management to give money back because they had a lousy year?  Yes, it's happened, but wow is it rare.  Conversely, how often do we see players sitout and demand a better contract "so they get paid" based on a productive year?

[ChicosBailBonds]

This has got to be one of the more absurd arguments I have read.

This has nothing to do with an age based restriction.  It has to do with a system whereby a cartel can dictate the terms of the contract arrangement. 

I suggest you reread what I said and then also read some of the expert analysis that is out there.  I didn't deny what you are saying, but there is more to it. For you to say it has NOTHING to do with age based restriction is just flat wrong.

[GGGG]

I suggest you reread what I said and then also read some of the expert analysis that is out there.  I didn't deny what you are saying, but there is more to it. For you to say it has NOTHING to do with age based restriction is just flat wrong.

I read it.  The "expert (sic) analysis (sic)" sucked.

It's the same trite by the same people who are vested in the system and scared of change.

[keefe]

It's the same trite by the same people who are vested in the system and scared of change.

It's also the same tripe

[GGGG]

It's also the same tripe

LOL...yeah...that too.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I read it.  The "expert (sic) analysis (sic)" sucked.

It's the same trite by the same people who are vested in the system and scared of change.

It's been ruled in the courts and hashed out by many legal experts in this country.  Not all agree, of course that's always the case with legal opinions.

“The idea that any minimum age requirement is unfair is absolutely wrong,” said Gary Roberts, director of sports law at Tulane Law School."

Ironically, Mr. Roberts doesn't like the decision, but at least he acknowledges that it isn't wrong. 


The question I have for you and others is, where does it stop?  Is it 18 years old instead of 19?  What about 17?  If there is a great 17 year old, why shouldn't he be able to play?  Why not 16?  There's always going to be a cutoff that is going to "deprive" someone of their ability to earn. 

I offer this, more "expert analysis" that you will think sucks.      http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000139190/article/jadeveon-clowney-stimulates-debate-on-nfl-draft-age-restriction

[GGGG]

It's been ruled in the courts and hashed out by many legal experts in this country.  Not all agree, of course that's always the case with legal opinions.

“The idea that any minimum age requirement is unfair is absolutely wrong,” said Gary Roberts, director of sports law at Tulane Law School."

Ironically, Mr. Roberts doesn't like the decision, but at least he acknowledges that it isn't wrong. 


The question I have for you and others is, where does it stop?  Is it 18 years old instead of 19?  What about 17?  If there is a great 17 year old, why shouldn't he be able to play?  Why not 16?  There's always going to be a cutoff that is going to "deprive" someone of their ability to earn. 

I offer this, more "expert analysis" that you will think sucks.      http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000139190/article/jadeveon-clowney-stimulates-debate-on-nfl-draft-age-restriction

No one is arguing that age limitations aren't legal.  It's yet another Chicos' Strawman.  You brought up age restrictions, but age restrictions has NOTHING TO DO with the topic at hand.  The topic has to do with the players limitations under the terms of the NCAA scholarship.  Those limitations ARE NOT AGE RELATED.  You could be a 40 year old scholarship athlete and still be subject to them.

So it is a completely irrelevant point!

[GGGG]

Pandora's Box...

But that's hardly a reason not to allow it.

[keefe]

But that's hardly a reason not to allow it.

The issue with endorsements and promotions is that it is far less empirical than salary. I have no problem with kids getting a stipend but I think that there needs to be a stratified, tiered system that is consistent across all Div I schools. Endorsements and promotions are fraught with potential fraud and unethical inducement. A simple, consistent formula is the only practical solution should the NCAA go in the direction of compensation.

[GGGG]

The issue with endorsements and promotions is that it is far less empirical than salary. I have no problem with kids getting a stipend but I think that there needs to be a stratified, tiered system that is consistent across all Div I schools. Endorsements and promotions are fraught with potential fraud and unethical inducement. A simple, consistent formula is the only practical solution should the NCAA go in the direction of compensation.

You can do something similar with endorsements as well.

[keefe]

You can do something similar with endorsements as well.

Yes and no. Kids sign with a school and they are given a tiered stipend. But promotions and endorsements are specific to the individual. I just think it is too difficult to apply fairly. And a school like  Marquette would be a distinct disadvantage vis-à-vis a Michigan, Notre Dame or Stanford. I don't think we want to get into that tail chase.

[The Equalizer]

So Andrew Wiggins is overcompensated for his value? You're going to have to explain that to me. In a free market - his "value" is 10's of millions of dollars - so getting $20,000-$25,000 dollars this year to play at Kansas means he is overcompensated?

Fine.  Let him get paid in Europe. Or Japan. Or Brazil.  Or any other international profssional league.  He doesn't have to play for Kansas.

He obviously thinks Kansas--even though they're not offering him cash compensation--is a better deal.

Why is that?
--Perhaps its the better media exposure at a top US college--not a small consideration when a significant portion of his income will be based on endorsements.
--Perhaps its the better access to NBA scouts.  If the NBA is his career goal, then Kansas provides a better enviornment to be exposed to the NBA scouts. 
--Perhaps its a believe that the US coaches are better able to prepare players for the NBA.

BTW, you cite the 20,000 to 25,000/year to play at Kansas--presumably the value of a scholarship. But what is the value you place on becoming a household name?  If you are a star at Kansas, the US sports networks will see to it that fans know who you are, which will help your negotiating power for endorsements.  What about access to NBA scouts? What about the value of preparation for the NBA?  Isn't that all part of the deal?

At some point, everyone makes tradeoffs even if its not the best for their short term finances. For example, someone who wants to become a filmmaker would be better off going to USC, even if they had to pay their own way 100% rather than accept a full ride scholarship to Northern Michigan (or a paying job with a local advertising firm).

Similar with people who take unpaid or low-paying internships.  In many cases, those same people could make more money waiting tables.  But it wouldn't move them closer to their career choice. They trade off short term cash for long-term career achievement.

Wiggins attending Kansas is (for him) perceived as the best shot at achiving his long term career goal. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

No one is arguing that age limitations aren't legal.  It's yet another Chicos' Strawman.  You brought up age restrictions, but age restrictions has NOTHING TO DO with the topic at hand.  The topic has to do with the players limitations under the terms of the NCAA scholarship.  Those limitations ARE NOT AGE RELATED.  You could be a 40 year old scholarship athlete and still be subject to them.

So it is a completely irrelevant point!

Sigh.  Yes, Brandx in this very thread brought up age 17 or 18 (below the 19 year requirement by the NBA).....so yes, age limitation has been brought up.  No strawman.  Just read what is in the thread.

[muwarrior69]

I know for a fact that Jordan or Montana never really tried that hard because their salaries weren't capped and they had all of the money they needed.

One of the greatest sports myths - that athletes don't try hard when they have made big $$$

When I was a kid I saw Bob Feller pitch a double header against the Yankees when Lemon got hurt. How many pitchers today pitch complete games?  It was an honor to play in the All Star game; today some players take a pass...don't want to get hurt. As a Yankee fan, A-rod the highest paid player, has been a bust in the post season. Any basketball fan who is not a Bull's fan know the refs gave Jordan that extra step or two on his way to score a basket. Anyone else it's traveling. He did'nt have to try hard, it was handed to him. The point is, if there was that big payoff to win, rather than being paid big money before you win, who would be more motivated.

[GGGG]

When I was a kid I saw Bob Feller pitch a double header against the Yankees when Lemon got hurt. How many pitchers today pitch complete games?  It was an honor to play in the All Star game; today some players take a pass...don't want to get hurt. As a Yankee fan, A-rod the highest paid player, has been a bust in the post season. Any basketball fan who is not a Bull's fan know the refs gave Jordan that extra step or two on his way to score a basket. Anyone else it's traveling. He did'nt have to try hard, it was handed to him. The point is, if there was that big payoff to win, rather than being paid big money before you win, who would be more motivated.

This has got to be one of the more absurd sports paragraphs I have ever read.  Pitchers not pitching complete games has nothing to do with their will to compete.  (And I really want some proof that Feller pitched both games of a double header.)  And Michael Jordan "didn't have to try hard?"  And even if I bought your theory that the "refs gave Jordan an extra step or two," what does that have to do with the amount of money he is paid?

Most players at the professional level are plenty motivated.

[brandx]

This has got to be one of the more absurd sports paragraphs I have ever read.  Pitchers not pitching complete games has nothing to do with their will to compete.  (And I really want some proof that Feller pitched both games of a double header.)  And Michael Jordan "didn't have to try hard?"  And even if I bought your theory that the "refs gave Jordan an extra step or two," what does that have to do with the amount of money he is paid?

Most players at the professional level are plenty motivated.

My thoughts exactly.

Jordan didn't have to try hard. I mean when he won the dunk contest, they actually moved the free throw line 3 feet closer to the basket. They didn't do that for any other player.

If there are complaints about not pitching complete games - shouldn't that be a criticism of management - I don't recall the last time a pitcher walked off the mound in the middle of a game and said "that's it for today".

[ChicosBailBonds]

This has got to be one of the more absurd sports paragraphs I have ever read.  Pitchers not pitching complete games has nothing to do with their will to compete.  (And I really want some proof that Feller pitched both games of a double header.)  And Michael Jordan "didn't have to try hard?"  And even if I bought your theory that the "refs gave Jordan an extra step or two," what does that have to do with the amount of money he is paid?

Most players at the professional level are plenty motivated.

Somewhat agree, but not completely.  Still have many friends in baseball and they will tell you there are pitchers out there that are reluctant to pitch deep into ball games because of the potential harm it can do to their arms, at least that is their perception.  They don't want to miss out on that next contract.  Now, certainly to your point the game has changed considerably and bullpens are setup now to allow for pitchers to not have to do that, but there are certainly some guys and their agents that have put in uncertain terms what their pitch counts should be.  You won't find any of this in the sports pages or on the web somewhere because fans would have a fit, but this does happen and it happens specifically to guys that are represented by several agents that play this game.  It's also why you see certain teams not wanting to deal with those agents or their players.

[keefe]

(And I really want some proof that Feller pitched both games of a double header.) 

I can't say about Bob Feller but I remember when Wilbur Wood pitched both games of a double header against the Yankees and lost both. Wood won 20 games that year. He also lost 20. Wood was a great knuckleballer who started almost 50 games a year and routinely threw more than 25 complete games.  Guy was a beast at 75 mph.