Oso planning to go pro
If they don't divulge the major violations by the end of summer, I'd say they lied.
"The biggest thing working against it is that the money companies and boosters are now donating to universities would, in some cases, instead go directly to student-athletes -- which means universities would lose control of some revenue, and God knows they hate the idea of that."Sounds a lot like something a really smart person here said.
Charades. As annoying chop/hack golfers at the local muni like to say...”balls in the air” on Nov 5, 2019 (2k Classic). What can a clean program do except try to beat the living @$&% out of the cheating @$$ $h1€bag$?! And make no mistake...we do things right here...you got a problem with it? There’s something wrong with you. We will win. We will win big. And we will win big..honorably. What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world, but lose his soul in the process?
I'll be more lenient with the timeline, but I just read that article that brewcity linked to, and my oh my did Stan Wilcox throw down the guantlet. After quotes like those below, if nothing actually happens, the NCAA is going to look even more foolish than they usually do."The main thing is that we're up and ready. We're moving forward and you'll see consequences.""So now that's it over, we're going to be moving forward with a number of Level I cases that will help people realize that, 'Yeah, the enforcement staff was in a position to move forward,'""Those top coaches that were mentioned in the trials where the information shows what was being said was a violation of NCAA rules, yes. They will be all part of these notices of allegations," "It's a great opportunity for the enforcement staff, the committee on infractions, as well as our whole community to now try to … put things back where they need to be,""The membership, particularly the coaching community, have been frustrated," Wilcox said. "Those cases started 2017? We're now in '19. They want action."
Yeah...if nothing comes of it, this stuff is really indefensible. Feels like there's likely to be a lot of overpromising and underdelivering. And while the calendar may still call this summer, let's be honest, everyone considers Labor Day the end of summer. I guess the generous can give him until September 23 and assume he was talking about the Autumnal Equinox, but we all know he meant that hammer was supposed to drop by now.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/candid-coaches-would-you-support-an-olympic-style-model-for-student-athletes/Weird. Most coaches are okay with the Olympic model being adopted for “student athletes”.They know the NCAA is a sham
Ha, yup! It’s always about the money in college sports. Always
No, everyone doesn’t....which is entirely the point. Look at universities on quarter system, they are on Summer break until later September.
That is weird...that most coaches would mean they surveyed 356 D1 head coaches....in fact they surveyed 100, which included assistant coaches not head coaches. So it is weird to say most when not even have of D1 head coaches were even surveyed.And then we have Gary Parish’s dripping bias in the article about coaches getting “super duper rich”. No Gary, a small handful are, the vast majority of the D1 coaches are not....but that’s Gary Parish for you.I’d be curious if the coaches even filled this out, or is this like the coaches poll where the admin or intern fills it out.I’d also like to know how many of these coaches are lawyers, or even have law degrees or a background in business....how are they going to handle Title IX or cost? Of course those little tidbits I can guarantee you weren’t asked in their little survey because that would complicate things too much. “You mean there might be legal and cost considerations...just let everyone have everything for FREEEEEEEEE”
Chicos have there been any posts since you’ve returned to that you haven’t replied to?
Title IX is completely irrelevant since all athletes in all sports would be able to partake in selling their likeness.As for your concern Marquette would become Army football, for your consideration.Marquette successfully navigated the changing landscape of college athletics in the late 80’s by foregoing major independence and joining the old MCC which at the time was populated by teams such as Xavier, Butler, Loyola, Evansville, St. Louis and Detroit. They did so because there was no future as an independent and conferences had begun being able to work TV deals.In a stroke of genius/luck, they joined a new league, The Great Midwest a few years later which included Cincinnati who made a Final 4 the year the league was founded. This in turn lead to Conference USA and a Final 4 bid a decade later and finally an invitation to the Big East.Not done yet, Marquette along with the Catholic 7 managed to escape Conference USA 2.0 and save the Big East from the Tulanes of the world. While not the Big East of 1985, the league is still one of the best in college basketball and Villanova has won two national titles in the new era.This brief history lesson tells me Marquette has adapted quite well in a landscape that is constantly changing and the notion they will become Army because players will be able to market themselves seems quite unlikely. And if it does and Marquette decides that being a university first and basketball school second is more important, huzzah for them.
You are missing some major portions to your analysis and if you don’t think Title IX lawsuits won’t be flying out you are crazy. It will start with this legal theory....the men’s team is marketed more giving them more access to create a market and thus endorsements....the argument will be to make the marketing equal.Then it becomes the men’s team plays at the Fiserv, and it isn’t fair they have that advantage for which they can then secure more endorsements by playing in a facility that garners more attention. And on and on it will go. You are also completely ignoring scale here, and I’m not sure why. Endorsements are about one of two things....one entity paying a ton, or many smaller entities paying a little. Scale matters. Big schools, lots of students, big city, public vs private, lots of alums, will matter more than ever.You say MU has managed well, yes we have done fairly well through some changes in large part because the NCAA and the conferences we were in helped to keep some level of sanity. It isn’t lost on my team irony that you are also not factoring in the very body you loathe that has helped MU to stay in the relative space they have. Not lost on me at all.
Marquette has stayed in the space they are because of Marquette, not the NCAA. In fact, it can be argued the NCAA limits what any university can become. Why aren’t there multiple Title IX lawsuits right now? Marquette men get to play at Fiserv and the women at the Al? Big East men play their conference tournament at MSG and the women don’t. That’s not equitable. What’s the travel budgets? Are they the same for all sports both genders play? Title IX is a crutch with no support in this argument.Also scale is ALREADY in place in college athletics. There are haves and have nots ALREADY. Amateurism is a sham
And then we have Gary Parish’s dripping bias in the article about coaches getting “super duper rich”. No Gary, a small handful are, the vast majority of the D1 coaches are not....but that’s Gary Parish for you.
You are missing some major portions to your analysis and if you don’t think Title IX lawsuits won’t be flying out you are crazy. It will start with this legal theory....the men’s team is marketed more giving them more access to create a market and thus endorsements....the argument will be to make the marketing equal.Then it becomes the men’s team plays at the Fiserv, and it isn’t fair they have that advantage for which they can then secure more endorsements by playing in a facility that garners more attention. And on and on it will go. You are also completely ignoring scale here, and I’m not sure why. Endorsements are about one of two things....one entity paying a ton, or many smaller entities paying a little. Scale matters. Big schools, lots of students, big city, public vs private, lots of alums, will matter more than ever.
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
From where I stand, every D1 basketball coach is super duper rich. Compared to most Americans all D1 basketball coaches are super duper rich. Compared to most of the world all D1 basketball coaches are richer than God.I work in Title IX compliance. None of this logic would come close to holding up.
2018 average DI basketball head coaches’ salary is in the $100,000’s range.https://work.chron.com/average-salary-college-basketball-coach-2102.html
This is what we call a mathematical impossibility.If the average D1 head coach's salary were even $200K, that would put the total salary for all D1 coaches at $70.2 million (351 X $200K). Problem is, the top 70 coaches in the USA salary database earn a combined $183.8 million (and that top 70 doesn't include coaches at several major programs like Marquette, Stanford, Pitt, USC, etc., all of whom earn upwards of $2 million). Heck, if the other 281 head coaches were working for free (note: they're not), the average salary would be above $500K a year.https://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/Once again, Cheeks, you need to do a better job of vetting your sources.
You mean the media got it wrong again? I really have to stop trusting these journalist# and academics like the PhD that wrote this article.