MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: jesmu84 on August 06, 2019, 06:28:37 PM
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/the-ncaa-continues-to-prove-its-the-most-pathetic-corrupt-organization
Thoughts?
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/the-ncaa-continues-to-prove-its-the-most-pathetic-corrupt-organization
Thoughts?
The Rich Paul rule. Death to the NCAA
-
"client athletes" is an interesting term for the NCAA to choose
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/barstoolu/the-ncaa-continues-to-prove-its-the-most-pathetic-corrupt-organization
Thoughts?
That was a piece of crap article.
-
The NBPA already certifies agents. It isn’t really necessary for the NCAA to do this.
-
Kentucky grad and terrible writer opines...
-
That was a piece of crap article.
Forest. Trees.
But ok.
Hopefully this measures up to your standards
https://sports.yahoo.com/nca-as-rich-paul-rule-shows-its-contempt-for-basketball-players-025307241.html
-
Both articles are opinion pieces, nothing else. Little intelectual work was done writing both. Bashing the NCAA is easy click baiting.
-
Here I thought we wanted kids to get an education and degree. The certification requires one. Too bad. Just as most schools require coaches to have a degree. Too bad.
-
Here I thought we wanted kids to get an education and degree. The certification requires one. Too bad. Just as most schools require coaches to have a degree. Too bad.
So why allow kids to leave college before they have a degree?
-
So why allow kids to leave college before they have a degree?
Well, that isn't up to colleges. I'm sure they would love a rule requiring kids to stay 4 years.
-
Well, that isn't up to colleges. I'm sure they would love a rule requiring kids to stay 4 years.
I don't believe it was a serious question. Guessing the teal was missing.
-
So why allow kids to leave college before they have a degree?
Because the NBA doesn’t require a degree. The NCAA does. Different rules for different orgs, part of life. Some companies allow drinking on the job, some require drug tests, some don’t allow jeans, etc, etc, etc. NCAA said these are the rules. Tough titties.
-
Forest. Trees.
But ok.
Hopefully this measures up to your standards
https://sports.yahoo.com/nca-as-rich-paul-rule-shows-its-contempt-for-basketball-players-025307241.html
“People start businesses doomed to fail. They get married and divorced. They add Rutgers to their conference.”
This is internet-winning stuff!
-
Because the NBA doesn’t require a degree. The NCAA does. Different rules for different orgs, part of life. Some companies allow drinking on the job, some require drug tests, some don’t allow jeans, etc, etc, etc. NCAA said these are the rules. Tough titties.
Every single person that works with the NCAA is required a degree? I hope truck drivers or people putting the NCAA Tournament floors together etc. all enjoyed paying for 4+ years of college to work in the field they do.
-
The Rich Paul rule. Death to the NCAA
I am pretty Rich Paul and Lebron can just buy a college, literally, and get Rich his degree.
-
I am pretty Rich Paul and Lebron can just buy a college, literally, and get Rich his degree.
It’s not a bad idea for Rich Paul and LeBron to start a developmental system that bypasses high school and college for kids that want to play basketball. Follow the European model of clubs
-
Wow look. Cheeks is a lapdog for the NCAA yet again. I am so shocked.
There is really no reason for an agent to have a degree. Nothing turns your product more meaningless than to require it when it isn’t necessary.
-
Wow look. Cheeks is a lapdog for the NCAA yet again. I am so shocked.
There is really no reason for an agent to have a degree. Nothing turns your product more meaningless than to require it when it isn’t necessary.
Why do schools demand coaches have a degree? It isn’t necessary either, at least to be able to draw up x’s and o’s.
Don’t like it, be an agent somewhere else. Play somewhere else. It boggles my mind that people get upset that that association and their members have the legal right to make their own rules. Complain all you wish, requiring the agent has a degree is not an onerous ask. Has anyone thought that perhaps the NCAA is trying to make sure some slapdick who has no legal, financial, or other positive skills that CAN be learned in the process of a degree may be of a benefit to the student athlete? The fact is there are many unscrupulous agents out there, and putting some requirements behind them isn’t the end of the world.
Think about it as regulations and govt oversight ...... from what I understand from some of you this is exactly what we need more of.....protections against evil people doing others wrong. More Regs! More regs! More regs!
-
Every single person that works with the NCAA is required a degree? I hope truck drivers or people putting the NCAA Tournament floors together etc. all enjoyed paying for 4+ years of college to work in the field they do.
Every administrative position at the NCAA requires a degree. Yes. Your truck driving example is odd. To become a truck driver you must pass whatever state requirements or certifications for a license....in other words, the rules or requirements set out by a governing body. If the state wants to require 4 year degrees for truck drivers, that is up to them. If the NCAA wants to require agents have a college degree and certification with the NBA, that is up to them. Straightforward and simple.
-
Why do schools demand coaches have a degree? It isn’t necessary either, at least to be able to draw up x’s and o’s.
Don’t like it, be an agent somewhere else. Play somewhere else. It boggles my mind that people get upset that that association and their members have the legal right to make their own rules. Complain all you wish, requiring the agent has a degree is not an onerous ask. Has anyone thought that perhaps the NCAA is trying to make sure some slapdick who has no legal, financial, or other positive skills that CAN be learned in the process of a degree may be of a benefit to the student athlete? The fact is there are many unscrupulous agents out there, and putting some requirements behind them isn’t the end of the world.
No one is arguing the NCAA doesn't have a right to do it. So stop slapping together that strawman. People are suggesting that the NCAA process is unnecessarily complicated and has ulterior motives.
The fact is the NBPA has a pretty thorough process already for certifying agents. Why can't the NCAA simply use that process and require that a NBPA certified agent take some sort of online workshop to make them aware of the NCAAs rules and process (instead of an in-person test)?
Because they want to continue to exert control even when it is not necessary to do so. It's an organization that is flailing around trying to retain its influence, but instead looks foolish at every turn.
Think about it as regulations and govt oversight ...... from what I understand from some of you this is exactly what we need more of.....protections against evil people doing others wrong. More Regs! More regs! More regs!
WTF does this even mean?
-
Every administrative position at the NCAA requires a degree. Yes. Your truck driving example is odd. To become a truck driver you must pass whatever state requirements or certifications for a license....in other words, the rules or requirements set out by a governing body. If the state wants to require 4 year degrees for truck drivers, that is up to them. If the NCAA wants to require agents have a college degree and certification with the NBA, that is up to them. Straightforward and simple.
So the agents are now NCAA administrative employees? These agents will be on the NCAA books and thus free of charge to the kids? That's big time news to me and explains it all. That's great then. Makes much more sense now that I know this nugget of information.
It's straightforward and simple...and really stupid and more reasons for kids who would otherwise go play college basketball to look at other options.
-
Every administrative position at the NCAA requires a degree. Yes. Your truck driving example is odd. To become a truck driver you must pass whatever state requirements or certifications for a license....in other words, the rules or requirements set out by a governing body. If the state wants to require 4 year degrees for truck drivers, that is up to them. If the NCAA wants to require agents have a college degree and certification with the NBA, that is up to them. Straightforward and simple.
If you can accept the truck drivers state certification, then why not accept the fact they are certified by the NBAPA? I can see having them pass a NCAA rules test but requiring a bachelor's degree is ridiculous.
-
If you can accept the truck drivers state certification, then why not accept the fact they are certified by the NBAPA? I can see having them pass a NCAA rules test but requiring a bachelor's degree is ridiculous.
If you can accept that a governing body sets the rules for truck driving license, why can't you accept the fact that another governing body (the NCAA) can set the rules for agent criteria?
Happy to play this game all day if you wish. They have the option to set their rules. These are the rules they have set.
-
No one is arguing the NCAA doesn't have a right to do it. So stop slapping together that strawman. People are suggesting that the NCAA process is unnecessarily complicated and has ulterior motives.
The fact is the NBPA has a pretty thorough process already for certifying agents. Why can't the NCAA simply use that process and require that a NBPA certified agent take some sort of online workshop to make them aware of the NCAAs rules and process (instead of an in-person test)?
Because they want to continue to exert control even when it is not necessary to do so. It's an organization that is flailing around trying to retain its influence, but instead looks foolish at every turn.
And nefarious people also want to break down the NCAA for financial personal gains, too. Of course that often doesn't seem to be looked at, it is usually the evil NCAA. Preventing the 0.5% from getting their just dues and entitlements.
And why WOULDN'T the NCAA want to establish THEIR rules in this? These are COLLEGE student athletes, not NBA players. Simply using the NBA criteria might be great for the NBA. If Lebron is upset, he and others can vote to change the CBA and allow these kids to go STRAIGHT to the NBA. What's stopping them? Go for it. Get these guys out of the NCAA and if they want to roll the dice and go to the NBA, God bless them and go for it. That way they can be under the guidance of the NBA agent rules. Until then, they are NCAA players and NCAA rules will apply. Simple.
-
And nefarious people also want to break down the NCAA for financial personal gains, too. Of course that never seems to be looked at, it is always the evil NCAA. Preventing the 0.5% from getting their just dues and entitlements.
No doubt. But what does that have to do with their new rule on agent certification? There isn't something about a bachelor's degree that makes someone less nefarious.
-
If you can accept that a governing body sets the rules for truck driving license, why can't you accept the fact that another governing body (the NCAA) can set the rules for agent criteria?
Happy to play this game all day if you wish. They have the option to set their rules. These are the rules they have set.
Yup, they have the option to set their rules, and their rules are stupid and going to hurt them. Like many of the rules they've set.
-
And nefarious people also want to break down the NCAA for financial personal gains, too. Of course that often doesn't seem to be looked at, it is usually the evil NCAA. Preventing the 0.5% from getting their just dues and entitlements.
When I look at those out for financial gain surrounding the NCAA, agents are way down on the list. They're often portrayed as a boogie man but coaches (HS, travel & college), boosters, shoe companies and travel teams are much more of an issue. In the end, follow the money...it's the shoes.
I also would love to hear who is pushing this rule and I wouldn't be surprised if it was coming from the agent establishment to push back on Rich Paul. Only the NCAA would be susceptible to get in the middle of agent beefs.
-
If you can accept that a governing body sets the rules for truck driving license, why can't you accept the fact that another governing body (the NCAA) can set the rules for agent criteria?
Happy to play this game all day if you wish. They have the option to set their rules. These are the rules they have set.
Hmmm, I'll remember this "as long as they have the right to do it, they can do it" argument the next time that you say colleges and universities shouldn't be allowed to set higher standards about student conduct.
-
Fran Fraschilla
@franfraschilla
What a mess! The FBI/DOJ college hoops bribery scandal was a sham.(The coaches & schools were VICTIMS? Really?) That led to the Rice Commission whose recommendations have been off the mark, so far. Oh, and the cheating hasn’t been deterred one iota. Sad.
-
Why would a player hire an agent who is not an attorney? (I'm not saying they must). You will need an attorney to review your contracts so why not pay one fee instead of two? My attorney was an NFL agent at one point and being a certified NFL agent requires a law license. Last I checked the NFL and its players are doing okay.
Anyways, I'm tired of LeBron and the like being constant victims. I have not read through every post/article but I'm sure the race card has been played (or will be) also. The uber liberal universities of the county have set up the system, which is their right, so now everyone need to play by the rules.
-
Why would a player hire an agent who is not an attorney? (I'm not saying they must). You will need an attorney to review your contracts so why not pay one fee instead of two? My attorney was an NFL agent at one point and being a certified NFL agent requires a law license. Last I checked the NFL and its players are doing okay.
Anyways, I'm tired of LeBron and the like being constant victims. I have not read through every post/article but I'm sure the race card has been played (or will be) also. The uber liberal universities of the county have set up the system, which is their right, so now everyone need to play by the rules.
And the laws they've been setting up are either 1) not enforced (see: FBI wiretaps with no punishments to the basketball programs involved) or 2) will result in the top players looking to play anywhere but in the NCAA. If Rich Paul wants to work with a star high school basketball player he'll just tell the kid to go to the G League, overseas, or train and not play for a year before heading to the NBA.
Nobody has played the race card. LeBron is not a victim in this case. Not sure what that has to do with the discussion. But last I checked Rich Paul has done okay for himself and his clients as well, yet the NCAA doesn't want to let him be part of this process. It's dumb.
-
Write a letter to Marquette’s president and Athletic Director. Word has it that we are a member of this association and vote in these matters. Let them know how you feel. You might just get an interesting response that says the school supports what the NCAA is doing here. ;)
-
Write a letter to Marquette’s president and Athletic Director. Word has it that we are a member of this association and vote in these matters. Let them know how you feel. You might just get an interesting response that says the school supports what the NCAA is doing here. ;)
Good to know. Hadn't heard that before.
I'm sure Lovell sent out an email to the president of every NCAA member institution saying "I like letting agents talk to top players. I do think there needs to be an educational background requirement to protect these kids from guys like Rich Paul, who helps kids become millionaires." And then maybe Gene Block responded with, "Yeah I agree Mike, in fact I think we should have Condoleezza Rice head up a group of people telling us how we should run our athletics."
All those degree requirements are really helping protect the student athletes at schools like USC, Wake Forrest, etc. You know, all those adults with bachelor degrees, and many times advanced degrees, taking hundreds of thousands of dollars to get undeserving kids into their athletics programs and taking away opportunities from student athletes who are actually...well, athletes.
Save the kids!
-
Gary Parrish @GaryParrishCBS
The implication of the NCAA’s agent-certification process is that a person with a bachelor’s degree is less likely to operate in a way that hurts players. What this ignores is that EVERY COACH arrested for taking cash to steer players to sketchy people had a bachelor’s degree.
-
Gary Parrish @GaryParrishCBS
The implication of the NCAA’s agent-certification process is that a person with a bachelor’s degree is less likely to operate in a way that hurts players. What this ignores is that EVERY COACH arrested for taking cash to steer players to sketchy people had a bachelor’s degree.
This. But hey, can't question it because the schools have agreed to this so nothing to see here, it's perfectly run!
-
It's incredible to me that the NCAA is focusing on the agent certification yet they see no problems with
Travel teams completely funded by shoe companies
High Schools propped up by shoe companies
Coaches salaries supported by shoe companies
Diamond Stone played for a UA sponsored travel team, his HS was UA at the time (it's Nike now, Giannis) then he chose between two UA schools. But yeah it's Rich Paul's lack of college education.
-
Why would a player hire an agent who is not an attorney? (I'm not saying they must). You will need an attorney to review your contracts so why not pay one fee instead of two? My attorney was an NFL agent at one point and being a certified NFL agent requires a law license. Last I checked the NFL and its players are doing okay.
Because the idea that an agent is simply someone to review a contract is a dated one.
-
Why would a player hire an agent who is not an attorney? (I'm not saying they must). You will need an attorney to review your contracts so why not pay one fee instead of two? My attorney was an NFL agent at one point and being a certified NFL agent requires a law license. Last I checked the NFL and its players are doing okay.
Because when you hire an agent, you're actually hiring that agent's firm, which no doubt includes attorneys.
And no, being a certified NFL agent does not require a law license.
https://www.nflpa.com/agents/how-to-become-an-agent
-
This all sounds squirmy (and hypocritical) to me.
Let's just cut to the chase: Just Win, Baby!
-
This is a "course of dealing" problem. It is plain as day that the NCAA doesn't really give a damn about the wellbeing of the student-athletes, at least in comparison to protecting its labor source at its current price point. Through that lens, this is clearly laying the gauntlet to the NBA and other outside orgs about who is in charge and who has to play by what rules.
For proof, just play out the case of the first kid that hires an agent not certified under the new rules. The NCAA won't provide any real hands-on guidance in the agent vetting process, the kid will hire some guy from his AAU days or something, and then when the kid wants to come back, he'll be ruled ineligible and have to play overseas. Again, the NCAA is perfectly happy layering more rules onto their Rube Goldberg design, so long as they don't actually have to spend time or money helping the people allegedly helped by those rules navigate them.
In a vacuum, if the NCAA had any recent history of acting in student-athletes legitimate best interests, this would be a good rule. It would theoretically prevent early entrants from being preyed on by unqualified "agents" whispering in their ear but not providing any financial security or guarantees. But the NCAA won't provide any support to navigate their new rule, and instead it will just be another technicality that gets kids ruled ineligible, further cementing the the end-all power of eligibility determination in the hands of the NCAA.
-
Why would a player hire an agent who is not an attorney? (I'm not saying they must). You will need an attorney to review your contracts so why not pay one fee instead of two? My attorney was an NFL agent at one point and being a certified NFL agent requires a law license. Last I checked the NFL and its players are doing okay.
Anyways, I'm tired of LeBron and the like being constant victims. I have not read through every post/article but I'm sure the race card has been played (or will be) also. The uber liberal universities of the county have set up the system, which is their right, so now everyone need to play by the rules.
Was wondering who would bring race into this discussion first.
Why are you sure the race card has been played? Certain people always worry that the race card will affect their own privilege.
-
I don't think it's a race thing as much as it is a old money / new money thing. I'm guessing some more "established" agents guided the NCAA into this criteria. The last thing the old money agents want is players enabling their friends to create agency like Klutch.
-
This is a "course of dealing" problem. It is plain as day that the NCAA doesn't really give a damn about the wellbeing of the student-athletes, at least in comparison to protecting its labor source at its current price point. Through that lens, this is clearly laying the gauntlet to the NBA and other outside orgs about who is in charge and who has to play by what rules.
For proof, just play out the case of the first kid that hires an agent not certified under the new rules. The NCAA won't provide any real hands-on guidance in the agent vetting process, the kid will hire some guy from his AAU days or something, and then when the kid wants to come back, he'll be ruled ineligible and have to play overseas. Again, the NCAA is perfectly happy layering more rules onto their Rube Goldberg design, so long as they don't actually have to spend time or money helping the people allegedly helped by those rules navigate them.
In a vacuum, if the NCAA had any recent history of acting in student-athletes legitimate best interests, this would be a good rule. It would theoretically prevent early entrants from being preyed on by unqualified "agents" whispering in their ear but not providing any financial security or guarantees. But the NCAA won't provide any support to navigate their new rule, and instead it will just be another technicality that gets kids ruled ineligible, further cementing the the end-all power of eligibility determination in the hands of the NCAA.
Absolutely the best take so far on this.
Thanks for your well-reasoned, articulate contribution.
-
I don't think it's a race thing as much as it is a old money / new money thing. I'm guessing some more "established" agents guided the NCAA into this criteria. The last thing the old money agents want is players enabling their friends to create agency like Klutch.
I agree totally.
Was just calling someone out for saying blacks would take advantage of the new rule.
-
Seems perfectly reasonable to me
https://twitter.com/insidethencaa/status/1159253597676351493?s=21
-
When I look at those out for financial gain surrounding the NCAA, agents are way down on the list. They're often portrayed as a boogie man but coaches (HS, travel & college), boosters, shoe companies and travel teams are much more of an issue. In the end, follow the money...it's the shoes.
I also would love to hear who is pushing this rule and I wouldn't be surprised if it was coming from the agent establishment to push back on Rich Paul. Only the NCAA would be susceptible to get in the middle of agent beefs.
Maybe it is because I have to deal with them on a weekly basis, but agents are an interesting crew....I will leave it at that.
-
Because when you hire an agent, you're actually hiring that agent's firm, which no doubt includes attorneys.
And no, being a certified NFL agent does not require a law license.
https://www.nflpa.com/agents/how-to-become-an-agent
Not all agents are tied to a firm, you might be surprised how many are one man shows or have very limited staff.
-
This all sounds squirmy (and hypocritical) to me.
Let's just cut to the chase: Just Win, Baby!
Just cheat baby, we’ll clean it up later if we are caught. Ah yes
-
The degree requirement is BS. So if a NBA player that spent 15 years in the league, was involved in the NBAPA, but left school early wants to be an agent, they are barred from representing these players because of a few credits? This is all about control over something the NCAA has no say in.
-
The NBAPA thinks a degree is important for agents yet the NCAA is wrong for the same standard?
I swear all the whining about everything the NCAA does is a little much......Doug Gottlieb had a good segment on this today.
-
The NBAPA thinks a degree is important for agents yet the NCAA is wrong for the same standard?
I swear all the whining about everything the NCAA does is a little much......Doug Gottlieb had a good segment on this today.
We have a bingo!!!
People just love to pile on the NCaA and their bootlickers apparently. Half the time they have no idea what they are even talking about. Loved the NCAA response, and considering a friend of mine is in their media relations dept it made me smile even more.
(http://a66.tinypic.com/24bugdu.jpg)
-
Was wondering who would bring race into this discussion first.
Why are you sure the race card has been played? Certain people always worry that the race card will affect their own privilege.
It was played yesterday and not at all surprising that it was. The go to playbook these days. Great response by NCAA today....all the facts, no emotion, just put that statement out and go out for a glass of wine.
Sincerely,
NCAA bootlicker
-
Then how is Rich Paul an agent? Is he not certified? Did they change the rule? Waive it?
If the NBPA added such a requirement, then that's foolhardy as well.
And the idea the NCAA needs stricter criteria than the NBPA is laughable - especially since the NBPA criteria were good enough for this year.
-
nm
-
https://twitter.com/amydashtv/status/1159265571495731211?s=21
-
The NBAPA thinks a degree is important for agents yet the NCAA is wrong for the same standard?
Given that the NBAPA has certified many agents without a college degree (such as Rich Paul), they obviously don't think it's terribly important.
-
https://twitter.com/amydashtv/status/1159265571495731211?s=21
The point is that the NBPA already certifies refs. The NCAA doesn't need another process.
-
Then how is Rich Paul an agent? Is he not certified? Did they change the rule? Waive it?
If the NBPA added such a requirement, then that's foolhardy as well.
And the idea the NCAA needs stricter criteria than the NBPA is laughable - especially since the NBPA criteria were good enough for this year.
https://twitter.com/robdauster/status/1159256191429746688?s=21
This thread explains it a little. Also, shows the number of NBA guys not represented by firms is fairly low. But I’d imagine a higher percentage of the high schoolers and college kids wouldn’t be repped by firms.
-
Maybe it is because I have to deal with them on a weekly basis, but agents are an interesting crew....I will leave it at that.
I’ve been on both sides of the agent coin. I’ve worked to represent athletes in their marketing efforts and have needed to hold out / counter to maximize their worth on a project. I’ve also served as a talent buyer and had to contract with agents (NFL, MLB & NBA certified) for various projects. I’ve dealt with mom & pops, I’ve dealt with CAA & Wasserman. Guys with Harvard Law degrees and guys from commuter colleges. Some are like negotiating with your best friend, some are absolute slime balls. What I learned is agents are really no different than other aspects of society. The gross generalizations are just that, gross.
-
https://twitter.com/robdauster/status/1159256191429746688?s=21
This thread explains it a little. Also, shows the number of NBA guys not represented by firms is fairly low. But I’d imagine a higher percentage of the high schoolers and college kids wouldn’t be repped by firms.
OK just what I suspected. The bachelor's degree requirement isn't really a requirement.
And Dauster is 100% right. The NCAA could have made it simple, but they didn't.
-
The Athletic nails it.
What these rules do — particularly the need for a bachelor’s degree and the need to have been a certified agent for three years — is create unnecessary barriers to entry for people trying to get into the agency business. The best way for agents breaking into the business to get clients — if you’re not Paul and grew up 20 minutes from LeBron — is to get guys on the borderline, build your business by evaluating well and hitting on those guys, then continuing to sustainably move up into bigger players as you become more well-known throughout the industry. The three-year certification barrier takes a huge pool of borderline players out of the mix for these new, incoming agents, and makes it much harder for them to find success.
And as I’m sure Paul would argue, the need for a degree is largely superfluous to an agency’s business. There isn’t a school in the country offering training on how to be a sports agent. And if they do offer something like it, it certainly wouldn’t actually prepare anyone for the actual profession. Beyond that, the reasoning for these rules paint agents with a broad brush of malice, and allows the agencies that have been institutionalized already to maintain the status quo.
And if we believe these rules are set up to maintain the status quo, that means they are maintaining a status quo that is predominantly made up of white males. Currently, only three of the 12 agents who represent players totaling $100 million in yearly salaries are African-American (Paul, Austin Brown and Bill Duffy), despite the fact that about 74 percent of all players in the league are African-American. Essentially, by putting more power in the hands of those who are already established, these rules — particularly the three years an agent must be NBPA-certified for prior to becoming eligible to be NCAA-certified — keeps things the same, which actively hinders the ability of the agency industry to become more diverse, which is something that it desperately needs. Paul has shown that over the last five years.
https://theathletic.com/1121724/2019/08/07/vecenie-ncaas-rich-paul-rule-isnt-about-this-rich-paul-but-the-next-one/
-
So let me get this straight.
One organization who has a vested interest in retaining the status quo, consulted with a bunch of people who have a similar interest, and they come up with something that concentrates power and access to those who already have it, and Cheeks is cheering them all on?
I am shocked.
-
The Athletic nails it.
What these rules do — particularly the need for a bachelor’s degree and the need to have been a certified agent for three years — is create unnecessary barriers to entry for people trying to get into the agency business. The best way for agents breaking into the business to get clients — if you’re not Paul and grew up 20 minutes from LeBron — is to get guys on the borderline, build your business by evaluating well and hitting on those guys, then continuing to sustainably move up into bigger players as you become more well-known throughout the industry. The three-year certification barrier takes a huge pool of borderline players out of the mix for these new, incoming agents, and makes it much harder for them to find success.
And as I’m sure Paul would argue, the need for a degree is largely superfluous to an agency’s business. There isn’t a school in the country offering training on how to be a sports agent. And if they do offer something like it, it certainly wouldn’t actually prepare anyone for the actual profession. Beyond that, the reasoning for these rules paint agents with a broad brush of malice, and allows the agencies that have been institutionalized already to maintain the status quo.
And if we believe these rules are set up to maintain the status quo, that means they are maintaining a status quo that is predominantly made up of white males. Currently, only three of the 12 agents who represent players totaling $100 million in yearly salaries are African-American (Paul, Austin Brown and Bill Duffy), despite the fact that about 74 percent of all players in the league are African-American. Essentially, by putting more power in the hands of those who are already established, these rules — particularly the three years an agent must be NBPA-certified for prior to becoming eligible to be NCAA-certified — keeps things the same, which actively hinders the ability of the agency industry to become more diverse, which is something that it desperately needs. Paul has shown that over the last five years.
https://theathletic.com/1121724/2019/08/07/vecenie-ncaas-rich-paul-rule-isnt-about-this-rich-paul-but-the-next-one/
Thanks for providing this, Pakuni.
-
Just cheat baby, we’ll clean it up later if we are caught. Ah yes
I'm just glad all those people with 4 year degrees are protecting these innocent student athletes. Thank God schools like USC and Wake Forrest require all employees to have a 4 year degree or else they might have employees taking bribes to put student "athletes" onto their athletics team without ever playing the sports that they are on a roster for. Phew! Definitely avoided a possible catastrophe there! The student athletes at these schools can rest assured that they are all very deserving of their spot because their coaches and administrators all have 4 year degrees which makes them no risk to do anything shady that might hurt their chances of success!
-
So let me get this straight.
One organization who has a vested interest in retaining the status quo, consulted with a bunch of people who have a similar interest, and they come up with something that concentrates power and access to those who already have it, and Cheeks is cheering them all on?
I am shocked.
LOL
The NCAA could cure cancer tomorrow and make a billion donation to the homeless and you guys would bitch.
First of all, they took the Rice Commission recommendations which is not the status quo, so I don’t know how you get there. Second, if they didn’t consult with the agent community for some input, what would have happened? Hmm, the bitching left and right for not taking their POV would have been the theme for the day of our lovely media and talking heads. No matter what they lose and get hammered regardless. Classic, absolutely classic.
Stick to your guns NCAA, if the people that are bitching about it remain those that are, you are doing it absolutely correct. Tough titties and they can get bent.
-
The Athletic nails it.
What these rules do — particularly the need for a bachelor’s degree and the need to have been a certified agent for three years — is create unnecessary barriers to entry for people trying to get into the agency business. The best way for agents breaking into the business to get clients — if you’re not Paul and grew up 20 minutes from LeBron — is to get guys on the borderline, build your business by evaluating well and hitting on those guys, then continuing to sustainably move up into bigger players as you become more well-known throughout the industry. The three-year certification barrier takes a huge pool of borderline players out of the mix for these new, incoming agents, and makes it much harder for them to find success.
And as I’m sure Paul would argue, the need for a degree is largely superfluous to an agency’s business. There isn’t a school in the country offering training on how to be a sports agent. And if they do offer something like it, it certainly wouldn’t actually prepare anyone for the actual profession. Beyond that, the reasoning for these rules paint agents with a broad brush of malice, and allows the agencies that have been institutionalized already to maintain the status quo.
And if we believe these rules are set up to maintain the status quo, that means they are maintaining a status quo that is predominantly made up of white males. Currently, only three of the 12 agents who represent players totaling $100 million in yearly salaries are African-American (Paul, Austin Brown and Bill Duffy), despite the fact that about 74 percent of all players in the league are African-American. Essentially, by putting more power in the hands of those who are already established, these rules — particularly the three years an agent must be NBPA-certified for prior to becoming eligible to be NCAA-certified — keeps things the same, which actively hinders the ability of the agency industry to become more diverse, which is something that it desperately needs. Paul has shown that over the last five years.
https://theathletic.com/1121724/2019/08/07/vecenie-ncaas-rich-paul-rule-isnt-about-this-rich-paul-but-the-next-one/
Sam playing the race card, it’s what Sam does....right out of his playbook. Libs eating it up of course. Mindless drones droning on.
Sam would have been smarter to say this is a chess move to force the NBA to change the CBA, but Sam went for the cheap laughs and the lame argument that the 40% will buy no matter what.
-
I'm just glad all those people with 4 year degrees are protecting these innocent student athletes. Thank God schools like USC and Wake Forrest require all employees to have a 4 year degree or else they might have employees taking bribes to put student "athletes" onto their athletics team without ever playing the sports that they are on a roster for. Phew! Definitely avoided a possible catastrophe there! The student athletes at these schools can rest assured that they are all very deserving of their spot because their coaches and administrators all have 4 year degrees which makes them no risk to do anything shady that might hurt their chances of success!
Excellent. Thoughts and prayers, too. Excellent excellent stuff having exceptions prove out the rule, sure you want to play that game?
-
Someone's becoming unhinged.
-
Excellent. Thoughts and prayers, too. Excellent excellent stuff having exceptions prove out the rule, sure you want to play that game?
Exceptions? Someone’s been living under a rock...
Tough titties baby! Get bent son!
(How’s my street cred? Am I hard? - JB it’s teed up for you...)
-
Just cheat baby, we’ll clean it up later if we are caught. Ah yes
As long as the NCAA members agree!
-
Personally, I think it's better if agents don't have bachelor's degrees. That way when they cheat, they won't be smart enough not to get caught!
I honestly don't have a dog in this fight. As a general rule, I think less degree requirements is better than more, but it's not something that gets me hot and bothered
-
LOL
The NCAA could cure cancer tomorrow and make a billion donation to the homeless and you guys would bitch.
First of all, they took the Rice Commission recommendations which is not the status quo, so I don’t know how you get there. Second, if they didn’t consult with the agent community for some input, what would have happened? Hmm, the bitching left and right for not taking their POV would have been the theme for the day of our lovely media and talking heads. No matter what they lose and get hammered regardless. Classic, absolutely classic.
Stick to your guns NCAA, if the people that are bitching about it remain those that are, you are doing it absolutely correct. Tough titties and they can get bent.
The Rice Commission is a example of making as little change as possible, while basically maintaining the status quo. It was a disaster.
-
Gary Parrish brings up a good point on his podcast. A hockey player can get drafted in the NHL Draft, decide he doesn't like his situation (for any reason at all), and head off to college and be eligible to play NCAA hockey. Same deal for a baseball player. But not only can a basketball player not return to school after he leaves his name in the NBA Draft (even if he goes undrafted), if he hires an agent that doesn't have a 4 year college degree to help him through the Draft process he is permanently ineligible from playing NCAA basketball.
Thank God the NCAA requires everyone it employs to have a 4 year degree or we might not have rules that make sense like this! Protect the kids from all those shady characters without an education!
-
It's not a bad idea to require a prospect to consult with an agent that is somehow qualified. It's just that having a certification process that is different than the one the NBPA uses is non-sensical. Rich Paul is one of the top agents in the NBA right now. Yet he cannot advise a student athlete of their draft status because he doesn't have a college degree. That makes no sense, and just incentiviizes behavior to undermine the rules.
The NCAA yet again managed to f*ck up a process that should be fairly easy and straight-forward.
-
It's not a bad idea to require a prospect to consult with an agent that is somehow qualified. It's just that having a certification process that is different than the one the NBPA uses is non-sensical. Rich Paul is one of the top agents in the NBA right now. Yet he cannot advise a student athlete of their draft status because he doesn't have a college degree. That makes no sense, and just incentiviizes behavior to undermine the rules.
The NCAA yet again managed to f*ck up a process that should be fairly easy and straight-forward.
Would you prefer the NBPA one, where everything is basically the same, except they have a completely arbitrary caveat where at their sole discretion they can violate the 4-year degree rule.
Not to mention Rich Paul, runs and is part of Klutch Sports, an agency. He can simply hire other agents to work at his agency that do meet that rule and then advise them anyways. You know, kind of like law firms, and just about every other certified profession, where the young guys do grunt work to sign clients to their agency.
Seriously, the people attacking the NCAA here are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, simply because they don't like the NCAA and want athletes paid.
-
Would you prefer the NBPA one, where everything is basically the same, except they have a completely arbitrary caveat where at their sole discretion they can violate the 4-year degree rule.
Not to mention Rich Paul, runs and is part of Klutch Sports, an agency. He can simply hire other agents to work at his agency that do meet that rule and then advise them anyways. You know, kind of like law firms, and just about every other certified profession, where the young guys do grunt work to sign clients to their agency.
Seriously, the people attacking the NCAA here are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, simply because they don't like the NCAA and want athletes paid.
I don't want NCAA athletes to get paid.
This is a very dumb rule.
-
Seriously, the people attacking the NCAA here are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, simply because they don't like the NCAA and want athletes paid.
Or maybe we see this as yet another clumsy attempt by the NCAA to consolidate power and authority over revenue-producing sports (read: revenue producing athletes). And if you're a fan of the college game, you should be opposed to this, because ultimately it threatens to drive more of the top players overseas or into MarJon Beauchamp/Darius Bazely situations.
Could you perhaps explain why the NCAA needs different agent and eligibility rules for basketball players than the ones it has hockey and baseball players? Is there something inherently different about basketball players that I don't understand?
(Note: "The NCAA can make whatever rules it wants" is not an answer to this question.)
-
Would you prefer the NBPA one, where everything is basically the same, except they have a completely arbitrary caveat where at their sole discretion they can violate the 4-year degree rule.
Not to mention Rich Paul, runs and is part of Klutch Sports, an agency. He can simply hire other agents to work at his agency that do meet that rule and then advise them anyways. You know, kind of like law firms, and just about every other certified profession, where the young guys do grunt work to sign clients to their agency.
Seriously, the people attacking the NCAA here are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, simply because they don't like the NCAA and want athletes paid.
I always prefer rules that aren’t absolute. So if the NBPA has a reason to not require a bachelor’s degree for a particular reason, I trust their process.
-
The Rice Commission is a example of making as little change as possible, while basically maintaining the status quo. It was a disaster.
If her name wasn't attached, I think they might have scrapped the entire thing by now. It was a disaster, but because they put such a high profile person in charge, they seem to believe they have to try to make it work.
-
Or maybe we see this as yet another clumsy attempt by the NCAA to consolidate power and authority over revenue-producing sports (read: revenue producing athletes). And if you're a fan of the college game, you should be opposed to this, because ultimately it threatens to drive more of the top players overseas or into MarJon Beauchamp/Darius Bazely situations.
Could you perhaps explain why the NCAA needs different agent and eligibility rules for basketball players than the ones it has hockey and baseball players? Is there something inherently different about basketball players that I don't understand?
(Note: "The NCAA can make whatever rules it wants" is not an answer to this question.)
Perfectly stated.
If her name wasn't attached, I think they might have scrapped the entire thing by now. It was a disaster, but because they put such a high profile person in charge, they seem to believe they have to try to make it work.
Agreed.
-
Seriously, the people attacking the NCAA here are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill, simply because they don't like the NCAA and want athletes paid.
"Mountain out of a mole hill"? Are you crazy? This rule will effect possibly in excess of 10 people out of the 400,000,000 plus people in the US. And to add salt to the wound, most of them are in the "1%" or soon will be.
Your disregard for social injustice is disgusting.
-
Or maybe we see this as yet another clumsy attempt by the NCAA to consolidate power and authority over revenue-producing sports (read: revenue producing athletes). And if you're a fan of the college game, you should be opposed to this, because ultimately it threatens to drive more of the top players overseas or into MarJon Beauchamp/Darius Bazely situations.
Could you perhaps explain why the NCAA needs different agent and eligibility rules for basketball players than the ones it has hockey and baseball players? Is there something inherently different about basketball players that I don't understand?
(Note: "The NCAA can make whatever rules it wants" is not an answer to this question.)
Except your first premise has no groundings in objective reality.
The latter is easy. Maybe it is because they were trying to actually craft a rule that benefits and protects student athletes.
The rule you are talking about for baseball applies only to high schoolers. Even then, they can only hire an advisor, and have to pay for all services and expenses out of their own pocket. Once they actually enroll in college they are not eligible to be drafted until they have completed their junior year. Then, they are not allowed to sign with an agent. They can get an advisor, that they have to pay, they can receive no compensation, if they want to retain eligibility for their senior year. Some aspects of the differences in draft are because of the MLB not requiring an athlete to "affirmatively state a desire to be in the draft," so technically they could be drafted without ever asking to be...kind of a big difference.
The Basketball rule, allows any student regardless of age (not just Juniors and Seniors) to get professional advice. More importantly, they can accept compensation, do not have to pay the advisor/agent for agent services, and still retain the ability to be eligible. All of these are exceptionally beneficial to the student-athlete, and vastly more beneficial to them than the Baseball Agent rules. The only factor that anyone can twist to the negative (and people here are doing so), is the requirements for the "AGENT" not the athlete. Those rule, quite clearly, are to benefit the athlete, by removing predatory agents that will fiash money at the athletes, and potentially ruin their college career, by looking out for their own selfish interests.
Honestly, I cannot see how anyone can rationally look at this as anything but a major win, for the athlete.
And I am a fan of the game, and encourage any player that thinks their long term career is better served by taking the Beauchamp/Bazley route. They should do what is best for them. That doesn't mean that their decisions should be banned from any consequences.
-
good perspective http://https://twitter.com/JimMcIlvaine/status/1159451029244698626
-
Except your first premise has no groundings in objective reality.
The latter is easy. Maybe it is because they were trying to actually craft a rule that benefits and protects student athletes.
Is that you, Mr. Emmert?
You can't seriously mean either of these things. And if you're naive enough to believe the NCAA acts to benefit and protect student athletes, I'm not sure there's any point in continuing this discussion.
As for the rest, I'll just note that your recitation of the different rules wholly fails to answer why different rules are needed.
Again, what's the difference between basketball players and hockey/baseball players that requires a different set of rules?
You're a smart person. I'm sure you can figure it out. (Hint: There's an old saying about what you should follow).
-
I don't want NCAA athletes to get paid.
This is a very dumb rule.
The rule is to protect athletes from predatory agents, like what happened with Zion Williamson this year. He signed with a predatory agency, and faced a $100M lawsuit. Honestly, he should lose this lawsuit, but likely will win because of a North Carolina agent law that would protect the athlete.
The NCAA law is expressly designed to limit predatory practices, that even the best, and best advised athletes can fall victim to.
-
good perspective http://https://twitter.com/JimMcIlvaine/status/1159451029244698626
Someone should inform Jim that the vast majority - if not all - of those shady agents had college degrees.
Laughable that some seem to think a college degree is some sort of shield against unethical behavior.
Alan Eagleson and Tank Black, probably the most notorious sports agents of all time, both had college degrees. Eagleson also had a law degree.
-
Is that you, Mr. Emmert?
You can't seriously mean either of these things. And if you're naive enough to believe the NCAA acts to benefit and protect student athletes, I'm not sure there's any point in continuing this discussion.
As for the rest, I'll just note that your recitation of the different rules wholly fails to answer why different rules are needed.
Again, what's the difference between basketball players and hockey/baseball players that requires a different set of rules?
You're a smart person. I'm sure you can figure it out. (Hint: There's an old saying about what you should follow).
Pakuni, you are better than the bolded. That is essentially saying that you are biased against the NCAA, so you will view any NCAA action in the worst light possible. That isn't a rational approach to analyzing anything.
You are mis-examining the latter. You are assuming the difference has to be in the "basketball players and hockey/baseball players," rather the difference can be, and is in this case, in the rules and operations of MLB and the NBA.
MLB does not have an "affirmative consent" rule for being in the draft, meaning you can be in the draft pool without wanting to be. That means athletes will need to have an avenue of maintaining eligibility if drafted without any action on their own. Also, it leads to advisory issues if you are drafted in determining what is best for you.
The NBA has an "affirmative consent" rule in regards to the draft. That means you have to declare and affirmatively indicate your desire to remain in the draft to be draft eligible. That is a massive difference. The agent rules now in place go to great lengths to provide a platform of advice and advocacy that is beneficial to the athlete. Is it perfect? No, because people aren't perfect, but to assign an ulterior motive to the NCAA is without evidence.
Both sets of rules are crafted towards the professional league rules/regulations (which differ). They are also designed to benefit the athletes. The new basketball rule, is far more beneficial to the athlete than any other NCAA agent rules...yet they are still being vilified for it.
-
I find it laughable that the NCAA pretends that a 4 year degree is a way to prevent shady people from taking advantage of these student athletes. Because NCAA athletics are so clean! As we know because Chicos points it out at every chance, the NCAA requires its employees to have 4 year degrees, almost every school requires their coaches to have 4 year degrees, etc. Thank goodness corruption could not possibly get into NCAA athletics because everyone is educated!
Not to mention, in order to leave school without your degree and become a millionaire you must consult with someone who does have a degree to save you. Because guys like Rich Paul aren't smart enough to do any good for his clients...
-
I find it laughable that the NCAA pretends that a 4 year degree is a way to prevent shady people from taking advantage of these student athletes. Because NCAA athletics are so clean! As we know because Chicos points it out at every chance, the NCAA requires its employees to have 4 year degrees, almost every school requires their coaches to have 4 year degrees, etc. Thank goodness corruption could not possibly get into NCAA athletics because everyone is educated!
Not to mention, in order to leave school without your degree and become a millionaire you must consult with someone who does have a degree to save you. Because guys like Rich Paul aren't smart enough to do any good for his clients...
I agree with your assessment that it is laughable to think that having a 4-year degree prevents shady actors.
That doesn't mean that the NCAA wasn't trying to act in the best interest of the athletes. No set of rule will ever be perfect in their design.
Also, the combined rules of the NBPA and NCAA, makes it really hard for "fly-by-night" predatory agents to take advantage of athletes. I think it is specifically those that the NCAA is targeting. Rich Paul, who is a unique outlier, was essentially hit in the crossfire.
-
good perspective http://https://twitter.com/JimMcIlvaine/status/1159451029244698626
What the hell does Jim know about the NCAA, college basketball, agents and getting drafted? Garbage.
I trust internet posters and Op-ed pieces. The NCAA is a bunch of idiots and racists who hate student athletes. Anyone who thinks the college presidents in the NCAA are smart enough to spell C-A-T is an NCAA apologist.
-
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison and Michael Dell need not apply. And Steve Jobs if he were still alive.
-
What the hell does Jim know about the NCAA, college basketball, agents and getting drafted? Garbage.
I trust internet posters and Op-ed pieces. The NCAA is a bunch of idiots and racists who hate student athletes. Anyone who thinks the college presidents in the NCAA are smart enough to spell C-A-T is an NCAA apologist.
You are literally the only person who has brought up race. And now you’ve done it twice. 🤔 There is nothing better in an argument than the person who is screaming about how disgusting it is that racism is being brought into the discussion...when literally nobody has said a word about racism or race.
Not to mention you're right. Jim speaks for all student athletes. Because nobody who has played in the NCAA and NBA in the last decade has spoken out about this at all. 🙄
-
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison and Michael Dell need not apply. And Steve Jobs if he were still alive.
None of these people could be either, lawyers, doctors, CPAs, architects, or a vast number of professions that have certification rules/regulations dictating who is qualified to serve in those professions either.
-
Someone should inform Jim that the vast majority - if not all - of those shady agents had college degrees.
Laughable that some seem to think a college degree is some sort of shield against unethical behavior.
FACT: 100% of people guilty of medical malpractice have medical degrees.
I'll take my chances on getting my medical care from someone with a degree and support the educational requirements to practice medicine.
Just because there are crooks and scumbags in all walks of life; that's no reason to eliminate standards.
-
"Mountain out of a mole hill"? Are you crazy? This rule will effect possibly in excess of 10 people out of the 400,000,000 plus people in the US. And to add salt to the wound, most of them are in the "1%" or soon will be.
Your disregard for social injustice is disgusting.
This isn’t a social justice issue so nice try.
It’s the continued defense of the amateurism model which is foolish and outdated.
-
None of these people could be either, lawyers, doctors, CPAs, architects, or a vast number of professions that have certification rules/regulations dictating who is qualified to serve in those professions either.
And neither can certified agents in the professional field who don't have bachelors. It's like the NCAA saying a bagel is an acceptable benefit but cream cheese isn't. Stupid
-
None of these people could be either, lawyers, doctors, CPAs, architects, or a vast number of professions that have certification rules/regulations dictating who is qualified to serve in those professions either.
There are exceptions to the above though. The University of Michigan doesn’t require a bachelors degree to attend law school and the state bar doesn’t require one either.
-
Pakuni, you are better than the bolded. That is essentially saying that you are biased against the NCAA, so you will view any NCAA action in the worst light possible. That isn't a rational approach to analyzing anything.
No, what it is saying is that the NCAA exists only to serve the interests of its member institutions, not its labor force. Its labor force is just a means to its end, i.e. enriching its members. I make no value judgements about that. It is what it is. The NCAA is a business like any other.
I just find it truly laughable that some wish to portray the NCAA not as a business, but as some sort of benevolent high-minded institution that cares about and wants to protect its labor and provide them with an education. That narrative is not only naive, but provably false. If you want, I'll list off a dozen ways the NCAA shows little regard for the well-being and academic success of its labor force (like, say, Tuesday and Wednesday night football games during mid-terms).
That is my approach to analyzing anything the NCAA does ... that it, like any other business entity, will act in its own interests. Any other analysis ignores the reality of what the NCAA is and why it exists.
And since you don't want to say it, I will. The NCAA has different rules for basketball players because NCAA members are enriched through the labors of its basketball players. And it is therefore in the NCAA's interest to exert as much influence and control as it can over its basketball players.
-
None of these people could be either, lawyers, doctors, CPAs, architects, or a vast number of professions that have certification rules/regulations dictating who is qualified to serve in those professions either.
But the NCAA isn't requiring agents to have a degree specifically tailored to serving as a sports agent, or anything close to it.
According to the NCAA, a person with a degree in English lit or women's studies is more qualified to serve as a player agent than Rich Paul.
How does that make sense to you?
-
You are literally the only person who has brought up race. And now you’ve done it twice. 🤔 There is nothing better in an argument than the person who is screaming about how disgusting it is that racism is being brought into the discussion...when literally nobody has said a word about racism or race.
Not to mention you're right. Jim speaks for all student athletes. Because nobody who has played in the NCAA and NBA in the last decade has spoken out about this at all. 🙄
Wade, fair enough on the race issue. You are right. I am unfairly lumping in previous bashing of the NCAA as running a "slave" type organization with free labor. (I assume you heard/read those arguments in the media in the past few years) I withdraw any comments concerning race.
As for Jim's comments, are you referring to a general bashing/defence of the NCAA by Jim versus other former student athletes? Are you referring to agents taking advantage of athletes?
As for agents taking advantage of athletes, personally I have not see significant coverage or comments from former NCAA athletes on this issue in the past 10 years.
As for former players bashing the NCAA in the past 10 years, yes I have seen plenty and Jim obviously does not speak for everyone.(I don't know all Jim's thoughts on the NCAA, for all I know he mostly dislikes the NCAA)
I will say that the vast majority of comments and criticisms of the NCAA are almost entirely devoid of facts, critical analysis and a basic understand of what the NCAA is and its purpose.
-
Wade, fair enough on the race issue. You are right. I am unfairly lumping in previous bashing of the NCAA as running a "slave" type organization with free labor. (I assume you heard/read those arguments in the media in the past few years) I withdraw any comments concerning race.
As for Jim's comments, are you referring to a general bashing/defence of the NCAA by Jim versus other former student athletes? Are you referring to agents taking advantage of athletes?
As for agents taking advantage of athletes, personally I have not see significant coverage or comments from former NCAA athletes on this issue in the past 10 years.
As for former players bashing the NCAA in the past 10 years, yes I have seen plenty and Jim obviously does not speak for everyone.(I don't know all Jim's thoughts on the NCAA, for all I know he mostly dislikes the NCAA)
I will say that the vast majority of comments and criticisms of the NCAA are almost entirely devoid of facts, critical analysis and a basic understand of what the NCAA is and its purpose.
So what is the basic understanding of what the NCAA is and its purpose?
-
This isn’t a social justice issue so nice try.
It’s the continued defense of the amateurism model which is foolish and outdated.
The 'social justice' satire line was the significant point you took away from my post? Hmm... interesting. That was an afterthought addition attempt at humor.
I don't know if you agree with me or not but I believe the universities and colleges (NOT the NCAA) are in a virtually no win situation to resolve the differences between the 99% of their programs and athletes who are true amateurs and the 1% that are D1 men's basketball and football players and maybe more specifically the top 2%-3% of that pool of athletes.
-
The 'social justice' satire line was the significant point you took away from my post? Hmm... interesting. That was an afterthought addition attempt at humor.
I don't know if you agree with me or not but I believe the universities and colleges (NOT the NCAA) are in a virtually no win situation to resolve the differences between the 99% of their programs and athletes who are true amateurs and the 1% that are D1 men's basketball and football players and maybe more specifically the top 2%-3% of that pool of athletes.
Let them all earn outside income.
-
Death to the NCAA
-
Pakuni, you are better than the bolded. That is essentially saying that you are biased against the NCAA, so you will view any NCAA action in the worst light possible. That isn't a rational approach to analyzing anything.
It'a a good back and forth between you and Pakuni. This time, I agree with him on most points.
I think your biggest mistake is to assume the NCAA is in place to help/protect athletes. There job is one-fold. To maintain the cash stream. Nothing else really factors into their decisions.
-
So what is the basic understanding of what the NCAA is and its purpose?
FBM, great question and there is not the time nor the space here to fully answer this but I'll start by pointing out a couple of the basics that the media almost always ignores.
First, the NCAA is a member institution. The NCAA employees do not make the policies. Any complements or criticisms of NCAA actions should be directed at the members. And while they are not infallible, most everyone need to keep that mind when comparing "joe six pack" on the internet or some ESPN opinions to the combined wisdom of the presidents of hundreds of the leading universities in America.
Second, the NCAA's purpose, is to govern intercollegiate sports. A very, very, small portion (1%?), by participation, of intercollegiate sports is Division I men's basketball and football. (and a small amount of those are profitable and a small percent of those are highly profitable). The member institutions must develop rules and policies for all programs and student athletes. These must be fair and equitable to all, least discrimination arises.
Third, all of the media and internet discussion of issues focus on a ridiculously small number of participants in D1 football and basketball and completely ignore that the NCAA regulations behind the "outrage" have been developed to fairly and equitably govern the sports (football and air rifle) and institutions (Duke and Incarnate Word)or protect ALL the athletes (Zion Williamson and Bryce Davis<9mpg@UofIW>).
Forth, the media simply forgets that the member institutions are trying to balance all of this with the constant presences of Title 9 and IRS regulations.
Fifth, the member institutions, on top of dealing very smart and wealthy agents and boosters that spend considerable resources to circumvent the existing regulations, have partner institutions who are complicit in rule breaking activities. That to say, there are some "foxes watching the hen house".
I could go on but I won't.
-
White, great answer.
I am in complete agreement with you that the NCAA is too often the bogeyman when an issue arises, but it is actually their membership that wants to keep things that way. And they love the fact that the NCAA can take the blame while they skate by. I would also suggest that they intentionally starve the organization of resources so that they aren't too efficient in their investigative powers. if you haven't already, read up on how the powerful D1 programs took control over their football television revenues in the 1980s and formed the CFA.
Anyway, one of the things that the NCAA and its membership want to do is make sure that they control the revenues to fund their own cost structure. So that is why they don't want to pay the athletes anymore than the cost of attendance, because that would essentially classify them as employees which would require all sorts of workman's comp coverage, etc.
But they also don't want them to receive outside income because they want to preserve that income for themselves. Why allow Zion Williamson to receive money from Nike when Duke University needs it to pay Coach K's salary? IMO they have created these barriers to primarily retain the revenues for themselves and not let the market dictate where they should fall.
-
Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Ellison and Michael Dell need not apply. And Steve Jobs if he were still alive.
Always exceptions to the rule. I’m sure there are people out there that could cut out cancer cells without a degree and license, feel free to go to them if you wish....but yes there are always exceptions and always will be. Glad we all agree.
-
This isn’t a social justice issue so nice try.
It’s the continued defense of the amateurism model which is foolish and outdated.
Then why are so many in media (fake, “legit” and social) making it a SJW issue? Hmmm
-
White, great answer.
I am in complete agreement with you that the NCAA is too often the bogeyman when an issue arises, but it is actually their membership that wants to keep things that way. And they love the fact that the NCAA can take the blame while they skate by. I would also suggest that they intentionally starve the organization of resources so that they aren't too efficient in their investigative powers. if you haven't already, read up on how the powerful D1 programs took control over their football television revenues in the 1980s and formed the CFA.
Anyway, one of the things that the NCAA and its membership want to do is make sure that they control the revenues to fund their own cost structure. So that is why they don't want to pay the athletes anymore than the cost of attendance, because that would essentially classify them as employees which would require all sorts of workman's comp coverage, etc.
But they also don't want them to receive outside income because they want to preserve that income for themselves. Why allow Zion Williamson to receive money from Nike when Duke University needs it to pay Coach K's salary? IMO they have created these barriers to primarily retain the revenues for themselves and not let the market dictate where they should fall.
Rumor has it Marquette is a member of the association and a member. Feel free to play the alumni card, refuse to donate, picket, whatever is appropriate so this grave injustice of requiring a college degree for this certification is overturned.
-
No, what it is saying is that the NCAA exists only to serve the interests of its member institutions, not its labor force. Its labor force is just a means to its end, i.e. enriching its members. I make no value judgements about that. It is what it is. The NCAA is a business like any other.
I just find it truly laughable that some wish to portray the NCAA not as a business, but as some sort of benevolent high-minded institution that cares about and wants to protect its labor and provide them with an education. That narrative is not only naive, but provably false. If you want, I'll list off a dozen ways the NCAA shows little regard for the well-being and academic success of its labor force (like, say, Tuesday and Wednesday night football games during mid-terms).
That is my approach to analyzing anything the NCAA does ... that it, like any other business entity, will act in its own interests. Any other analysis ignores the reality of what the NCAA is and why it exists.
And since you don't want to say it, I will. The NCAA has different rules for basketball players because NCAA members are enriched through the labors of its basketball players. And it is therefore in the NCAA's interest to exert as much influence and control as it can over its basketball players.
Explain to me how the Basketball agent rule hurts athletes or benefits "revenue" in comparison to the Baseball rule.
Would the Basketball players be better off by being forbidden from being drafted (if they enroll in college) until their junior year?
Would the Basketball players be better of by being forbidden from accepting any benefits from and agent/advisor, but rather having to pay all expenses out of pocket.
Would the Basketball players be better of by being required to pay "market rate" for any agent/advisor they enlist. Meaning a cost of $1000's of dollars to seek advice on the draft.
These are the questions one must answer when examining the NCAA motives in this issue. I cannot conceive of a way the Athlete is being harmed by these changes, similarly, it is not increasing NCAA revenue.
If the changes were made to make Basketball like Baseball agent rules, there would not be a negative affect on Basketball revenue, or athlete control. Rather, instituting baseball's agent rules would lead to a net disincentive from pursuing the NBA draft. There would be greater control of the athlete, and an increase in revenue by retaining top talent. Bottom line is applying the "Baseball rules" to basketball would be a net benefit to the NCAA and its institutions, and a net detriment to the athletes.
So the argument of NCAA ulterior motive here is misplaced.
Even people like Rich Paul are only moderately affected here. Rich Paul can very simply have other agents at his agency that target NCAA athletes at that phase of their career, similar to how Partners of big law firms use junior partners in regards to clients.
-
Is that you, Mr. Emmert?
You can't seriously mean either of these things. And if you're naive enough to believe the NCAA acts to benefit and protect student athletes, I'm not sure there's any point in continuing this discussion.
As for the rest, I'll just note that your recitation of the different rules wholly fails to answer why different rules are needed.
Again, what's the difference between basketball players and hockey/baseball players that requires a different set of rules?
You're a smart person. I'm sure you can figure it out. (Hint: There's an old saying about what you should follow).
What an enormous pile of excrement and bias, way to be a free thinker.
Yup, the NCaA is always there to screw the kids. Jeebus H Christmas
-
White, great answer.
I am in complete agreement with you that the NCAA is too often the bogeyman when an issue arises, but it is actually their membership that wants to keep things that way. And they love the fact that the NCAA can take the blame while they skate by. I would also suggest that they intentionally starve the organization of resources so that they aren't too efficient in their investigative powers. if you haven't already, read up on how the powerful D1 programs took control over their football television revenues in the 1980s and formed the CFA.
Anyway, one of the things that the NCAA and its membership want to do is make sure that they control the revenues to fund their own cost structure. So that is why they don't want to pay the athletes anymore than the cost of attendance, because that would essentially classify them as employees which would require all sorts of workman's comp coverage, etc.
But they also don't want them to receive outside income because they want to preserve that income for themselves. Why allow Zion Williamson to receive money from Nike when Duke University needs it to pay Coach K's salary? IMO they have created these barriers to primarily retain the revenues for themselves and not let the market dictate where they should fall.
Honest question Sult, do you know what the NCAA cost structure is? Most people don’t, but I think you might have a bit of knowledge here.
The main talking point by people is the NCAA is taking in billions....and then they huff and puff. They rarely go into the next part to show where the money goes and who benefits. An amazing disservice by those arguing about the revenue without pointing out the expense side and the recipients of most of that revenue.
-
It'a a good back and forth between you and Pakuni. This time, I agree with him on most points.
I think your biggest mistake is to assume the NCAA is in place to help/protect athletes. There job is one-fold. To maintain the cash stream. Nothing else really factors into their decisions.
Thank you.
But I don't think I'm not assuming the NCAA is in place to help/protect the athletes though. The NCAA has a ton of faults, but here I'm not making any assumption (at least I don't think I am). Rather, I'm looking at who benefits/is harmed from the rule as it's put in place. Including in relationship to the rules for other sports.
If you want my overall assumption/belief. My assumption is that the NCAA was worried about losing complete control here, and losing all top athletes due to potential longer term changes. To preempt that, they made a new rule, that greatly benefits/protects the athletes. Essentially they are playing the long game.
It gives substantially more freedom/options for the athlete, that results in a short-term loss for the NCAA, but long-term avoids the possibility of catastrophic change.
-
Thank you.
But I don't think I'm not assuming the NCAA is in place to help/protect the athletes though. The NCAA has a ton of faults, but here I'm not making any assumption (at least I don't think I am). Rather, I'm looking at who benefits/is harmed from the rule as it's put in place. Including in relationship to the rules for other sports.
If you want my overall assumption/belief. My assumption is that the NCAA was worried about losing complete control here, and losing all top athletes due to potential longer term changes. To preempt that, they made a new rule, that greatly benefits/protects the athletes. Essentially they are playing the long game.
It gives substantially more freedom/options for the athlete, that results in a short-term loss for the NCAA, but long-term avoids the possibility of catastrophic change.
The major area of disagreement between you and others (including me) is that some of us do not believe this "greatly benefits/protects the athletes."
I can't speak for others, but I believe it is the NCAA increasing the bureaucracy with the intent of maintaining or increasing control over the athlete-students.
It's also a bit of a cash grab, because they levy additional fees on prospective agents above and beyond what the agents must already pay to existing certifying bodies.
-
Explain to me how the Basketball agent rule hurts athletes or benefits "revenue" in comparison to the Baseball rule.
It limits their freedom to choose their own representation, and limits the field of potential agents. Less competition = worse terms for the consumer, which in this case the player.
Would the Basketball players be better off by being forbidden from being drafted (if they enroll in college) until their junior year?
First, this isn't entirely true. There are exceptions to the three-year rule.
But, yes, if going pro is an option out of high school is an option.
Would the Basketball players be better of by being forbidden from accepting any benefits from and agent/advisor, but rather having to pay all expenses out of pocket.
You're making waayyy to much of this. A rep is allowed to buy meals and pay for transportation for meetings as part of the agent selection process. It's not as if the players are getting SUVs and six-figure gifts, here. It's dinner and a plane ticket. Do you think Boras and Lozano are making their top prospects fly to them?
Would the Basketball players be better of by being required to pay "market rate" for any agent/advisor they enlist. Meaning a cost of $1000's of dollars to seek advice on the draft.
Yes, if that's his choice.
-
My assumption is that the NCAA was worried about losing complete control here, and losing all top athletes due to potential longer term changes. To preempt that, they made a new rule, that greatly benefits/protects the athletes. Essentially they are playing the long game.
1. How can you say this is about the NCAA keeping control over the top athletes - while avoiding catastrophic change - and at the same time say it's not a revenue issue for the NCAA? Seems contradictory.
2. How does requiring a bachelor's degree greatly benefit or protect the athlete? Is there some data out there that says agents with bachelor's degrees are better and more ethical than those without?
-
1. How can you say this is about the NCAA keeping control over the top athletes - while avoiding catastrophic change - and at the same time say it's not a revenue issue for the NCAA? Seems contradictory.
2. How does requiring a bachelor's degree greatly benefit or protect the athlete? Is there some data out there that says agents with bachelor's degrees are better and more ethical than those without?
For
1. Often in life/business entities make decisions that harm them (the NCAA) short term, as a backstop to avoid the possibility of longer term consequences. Now, that doesn't mean that the longer term consequences that are being mitigated will lead to harm to the athlete. It is entirely possible that mitigating the longer term change is beneficial to both parties. I personally believe that is the case here. But the more important part, is that the changes done here benefit athletes now.
2. It leads to a slightly higher bar to entry, that will limit a lot of random predatory agents. It also is the same as the NBPA rule. The difference is the NCAA apparently didn't want to have to run an arbitrary appeal process for non-degree agents, like the NBPA did. I don't blame them for that.
It limits their freedom to choose their own representation, and limits the field of potential agents. Less competition = worse terms for the consumer, which in this case the player.
So the Basketball player would be better off, only being able to hire "advisors," who are not allowed to contact or market you to any teams on your behalf?
A limitation on requiring a "bachelors degree" limits the field of agents so much, that they would be better off not being able to get an agent, but rather only have an advisor forbidden from marketing you to any teams?
Come on, that is absurd. This is a major advantage to Basketball players.
First, this isn't entirely true. There are exceptions to the three-year rule.
But, yes, if going pro is an option out of high school is an option.
Great, then get the NBA to allow high school athletes to be draft eligible. I'm fine with that. And if they aren't drafted or don't want to go to the NBA, let them go to college. Same agent rules (give them the basketball agent rules, as it is far far more beneficial to the athlete).
You're making waayyy to much of this. A rep is allowed to buy meals and pay for transportation for meetings as part of the agent selection process. It's not as if the players are getting SUVs and six-figure gifts, here. It's dinner and a plane ticket. Do you think Boras and Lozano are making their top prospects fly to them?
Baseball players are not permitted to accept any benefits at all from their "advisor," no meals, clothing, transportation to any events. Nothing.
Basketball players can receive benefits, including travel, meals, etc. to any events that do not exceed 48 hours.
Going to tryouts etc. can lead to $1000s of expenses. That is out of pocket for baseball, compensated in Basketball.
Major advantage to Basketball
Yes, if that's his choice.
It is not a matter of choice. Baseball players are required to pay their "advisor" for all services at market rate. That advisor cannot market them to any actual teams. That is additional $1000s out of pocket, and no agent services.
Basketball players do not have to compensate their "agent" and the "agent" can directly market them to NBA teams.
Major benefit basketball.
My take-home. The NCAA is screwing baseball athletes. They need to ask for the same agent rules as Basketball.
-
For those curious about differences between basketball and baseball representation, these memorandums and FAQs are helpful.
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/enforcement/2019ENF_NBAMemo.pdf
https://ncaaorg.s3.amazonaws.com/enforcement/2019ENF_MLBEducationalMemo.pdf
-
Forgetful .... it seems unlikely we're going to change any minds here, and that's fine. I'll not clutter the board with another point-by-point response.
-
OK just what I suspected. The bachelor's degree requirement isn't really a requirement.
And Dauster is 100% right. The NCAA could have made it simple, but they didn't.
If I understand it correctly, there is only one agent in all of the NBA that doesn’t have a college degree. Very much the corner case and maybe the NCAA will do the same thing.
This overall context I keep reading about how the NCAA does these kids raw, it sure seems like the lens people are looking through is one through the .5% and not all college athletes, all divisions, all genders, rev vs non-rev, etc. Very biased in my opinion.
-
Forgetful .... it seems unlikely we're going to change any minds here, and that's fine. I'll not clutter the board with another point-by-point response.
No worries. I was honestly trying to see how these changes are in any way harmful to the athlete. I honestly can't see any way they are. I also find them the most beneficial to the athlete of any NCAA agent/advisor rules.
I enjoyed the discussion. Hope you have a wonderful day.
-
The dumbest thing about this rule (and there's a bunch) is that by its own terms, its narrowly targeted to punish the extremely small sample size of people it claims to protect. If you take the NCAA at its word and say this isn't targeted at Rich Paul, the players caught up in this will be the ones with the least sophisticated support structures, who are most susceptible to the types of creeps this is trying to weed out. There will be literally zero people suspended for this who aren't the most vulnerable of the guys on the draft fringe. They will all be sympathetic figures, and in enforcement, the NCAA will look stupid and meanspirited. Again. Like always.
-
2. How does requiring a bachelor's degree greatly benefit or protect the athlete? Is there some data out there that says agents with bachelor's degrees are better and more ethical than those without?
I don't know if there is data out there that says agents with a degree are better but I also don't think it is a stretch or flawed logic for any organization to presume, on the whole, someone with a degree will be better qualified and better able to do a job or serve the needs of their client.
Subjective criteria are applied across all walks of like for eligibility to do certain jobs or activities. These criteria are NEVER fool proof but absolutely serve their purpose to protect people, groups or society.
As a shareholder of IBM, I am not the least bit offended (actually quite the opposite) that IBM requires programming technician candidates to have a computer science degree. That said, I know Bill Gates would never get that job and that's okay because IBM, its employees and the shareholders are better off served by having defined criteria for its staff to achieve the companies goals.
The two most successful people I know and who I am lucky to call friends and business partners never even thought to attended college. I guess you'd say they are in the 0.25%ers club and all self made. So I know first hand a degree is not an absolute prerequisite for being able to make great decisions, to have business success and to assist other in doing likewise. I have the majority of my net worth tied to these two gentlemen and am blessed to have it that way. That said, my public equity holdings portfolio is managed by a CFP who has a master degree and I would not have considered someone with less credentials.
-
No worries. I was honestly trying to see how these changes are in any way harmful to the athlete. I honestly can't see any way they are. I also find them the most beneficial to the athlete of any NCAA agent/advisor rules.
I enjoyed the discussion. Hope you have a wonderful day.
Thanks! Appreciate the back-and-forth.
-
Rumor has it Marquette is a member of the association and a member. Feel free to play the alumni card, refuse to donate, picket, whatever is appropriate so this grave injustice of requiring a college degree for this certification is overturned.
Thanks. You have offered this advice before.
-
I have to say, in general, discussing the NCAA's requirements for agents of potential/future NBA players feels like discussing the tax rules for luxury yachts. While there may be merritts behind agreeing or disagreeing with the NCAA's or IRS's positions, it's really of no consequence to everyone on this board or most everyone in this county.
MU Rah Rah!!
-
I have to say, in general, discussing the NCAA's requirements for agents of potential/future NBA players feels like discussing the tax rules for luxury yachts. While there may be merritts behind agreeing or disagreeing with the NCAA's or IRS's positions, it's really of no consequence to everyone on this board or most everyone in this county.
MU Rah Rah!!
That kind of attitude will never help us finally determine who is ‘right’.
-
Let them all earn outside income.
they really would need to hire an agent for this
-
Well the POTUS has a degree....
Arby's!!!
-
Well the POTUS has a degree....
Arby's!!!
Politics
-
Politics
Lol
-
That kind of attitude will never help us finally determine who is ‘right’.
LOL! My bad.
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/boston/rich-paul-finally-claps-back-at-the-ncaa-over-their-pathetic-rich-paul-rule
Also, check out Rich Paul's article in The Athletic
Here: https://theathletic.com/1128759/2019/08/12/op-ed-rich-paul-on-the-ncaas-new-restrictions-for-player-agents/
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/boston/rich-paul-finally-claps-back-at-the-ncaa-over-their-pathetic-rich-paul-rule
Also, check out Rich Paul's article in The Athletic
I am neither in favor of or opposed to the NCAA's new requirements because they do not effect me or anyone I care about or any portion of my life and it is not a social justice issue.
That said, that op-ed article above is garbage and any point the author was trying to make was lost in the juvenile rhetoric and misplaced angst.
Perhaps someone will present a factual, well researched and intellectually honest opinion (and without name calling) on the topic that will sway my opinion someday.
-
https://www.barstoolsports.com/boston/rich-paul-finally-claps-back-at-the-ncaa-over-their-pathetic-rich-paul-rule
Also, check out Rich Paul's article in The Athletic
Hey Wade, the race card has been played. See above.
-
NCAA reverses course, won't require a degree for agents.
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-amends-agent-certification-requirements
So, does this mean the NCAA no longer cares about protecting athletes ... since that (wink wink) was the real reason for this rule?
-
Hey Wade, the race card has been played. See above.
Did you read Rich Paul's op-ed? At no point does he do anything close to play the race card.
-
That said, that op-ed article above is garbage and any point the author was trying to make was lost in the juvenile rhetoric and misplaced angst.
It's Barstool. I have no idea why anyone with any sense reads them or links to them.
-
NCAA reverses course, won't require a degree for agents.
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-amends-agent-certification-requirements
So, does this mean the NCAA no longer cares about protecting athletes ... since that (wink wink) was the real reason for this rule?
Hilarious. Clearly they didn't understand the NBPA's entire process and stepped on a rake yet again. This is exactly what they should have done to start with.
-
NCAA reverses course, won't require a degree for agents.
https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-amends-agent-certification-requirements
So, does this mean the NCAA no longer cares about protecting athletes ... since that (wink wink) was the real reason for this rule?
But it wasn't a terrible rule and the people complaining about it just want to complain about anything the NCAA does and doesn't want athletes to get paid...
-
But it wasn't a terrible rule and the people complaining about it just want to complain about anything the NCAA does and doesn't want athletes to get paid...
It was a terrible rule, and context matters. At a time when the NCAA should be doing all it can to make the college route accessible and appealing to the best young athletes out there, it's bungling its way through unnecessary rules changes to make college less appealing.
-
It was a terrible rule, and context matters. At a time when the NCAA should be doing all it can to make the college route accessible and appealing to the best young athletes out there, it's bungling its way through unnecessary rules changes to make college less appealing.
Death to the NCAA
-
It was a terrible rule, and context matters. At a time when the NCAA should be doing all it can to make the college route accessible and appealing to the best young athletes out there, it's bungling its way through unnecessary rules changes to make college less appealing.
Agreed. My comment was tongue in cheek. A few people here were saying that people didn't even look at what the rule was there was just outrage to be outraged at the NCAA.
-
Did you read Rich Paul's op-ed? At no point does he do anything close to play the race card.
"See above" referred to the Barstool article (the link in the quoted section), not Rich Paul's op-ed (to which I have not seen a link). I did not make that clear.
-
Here is the article. It's free, I think: https://theathletic.com/1128759/2019/08/12/op-ed-rich-paul-on-the-ncaas-new-restrictions-for-player-agents/
-
Agreed. My comment was tongue in cheek. A few people here were saying that people didn't even look at what the rule was there was just outrage to be outraged at the NCAA.
So it makes it ok to just rail against the few? Really it is a dumb rule — they doubled down with some holier than though stuff about college education — then folded within the week. Both calling into question their initial motivation, the extent that it was truly well thought out and finally their commitment to their grandiose principles.
-
So it makes it ok to just rail against the few? Really it is a dumb rule — they doubled down with some holier than though stuff about college education — then folded within the week. Both calling into question their initial motivation, the extent that it was truly well thought out and finally their commitment to their grandiose principles.
Yeah. The NCAA ends up with egg on their face after a decision.
Some more breaking news, the Pope is Catholic.
-
So it makes it ok to just rail against the few? Really it is a dumb rule — they doubled down with some holier than though stuff about college education — then folded within the week. Both calling into question their initial motivation, the extent that it was truly well thought out and finally their commitment to their grandiose principles.
Absolutely hilarious. Total capitulation. As Bugs Bunny woulda said, "What a bunch of maroons."
Especially love this:
According to a news release, the NCAA made the change after having "been made aware of several current agents who have appropriately represented former student-athletes in their professional quest" and were granted waivers of the NBPA's bachelor's degree requirement.
In other words, if anybody with even the experience of an intern had done the tiniest bit of homework -- or if NCAA muckety-mucks weren't totally about trying to make a statement about control -- they never would have even tried to enact a rule they'd have to back down on within days.
-
The great injustice has been undone. All hail. "BUT BUT the NCAA was just screwing over Rich Paul and a certain segment of society!!"......well I guess that canard is no longer available.
-
The great injustice has been undone. All hail. "BUT BUT the NCAA was just screwing over Rich Paul and a certain segment of society!!"......well I guess that canard is no longer available.
Yeah I'm sure they thought they did nothing wrong they just felt like reversing it less than a week after they created the dumb rule for the fun of it...
They literally admitted the rule was as dumb and unnecessary as possible. Yet here is chicos STILL trying to play the persecuted rich white male.
-
People just love to pile on the NCaA and their bootlickers apparently. Half the time they have no idea what they are even talking about. Loved the NCAA response, and considering a friend of mine is in their media relations dept it made me smile even more.
Thoughts and prayers for your friend today.
-
The great injustice has been undone. All hail. "BUT BUT the NCAA was just screwing over Rich Paul and a certain segment of society!!"......well I guess that canard is no longer available.
I think we can all sleep better now knowing Rich Paul will be able to continue to feed his children. Who knows, maybe there will be a little left over so that there are some presents under the Christmas tree this year. One can only hope so.
-
I think we can all sleep better now knowing Rich Paul will be able to continue to feed his children. Who knows, maybe there will be a little left over so that there are some presents under the Christmas tree this year. One can only hope so.
"Ehh, the guy makes enough money as it is so let's take away some opportunity from him to gain new business for no good reason at all. And take away opportunities for young kids to work with the best in the business."
The beauty of America baby.
I love that people are still trying to defend this. The NCAA reversed their new (incredibly stupid) rule within 1 week of creating it yet people are still saying the only reason people are complaining is because people need to complain about everything the NCAA does.
-
A rule change within one week? Guess that rule was as good as (Marquette) Gold.
-
I love that people are still trying to defend this. The NCAA reversed their new (incredibly stupid) rule within 1 week of creating it yet people are still saying the only reason people are complaining is because people need to complain about everything the NCAA does.
I love that people care so much about a rule that impacts maybe 5 sports agents in the US.
I'm guessing the rule was a bad rule since they changed it so quickly. You seem very passionate about this issue so I congratulate you for being on the right side of the argument.
So, what now? Has your lot in life changed? Have the fortunes on MU basketball been improved? Will college basketball fans see a better product on the floor?
-
I love that people care so much about a rule that impacts maybe 5 sports agents in the US.
I'm guessing the rule was a bad rule since they changed it so quickly. You seem very passionate about this issue so I congratulate you for being on the right side of the argument.
So, what now? Has your lot in life changed? Have the fortunes on MU basketball been improved? Will college basketball fans see a better product on the floor?
You're on a college basketball fan forum complaining that people care too much about things that don't directly impact their life?
Hmmm.
-
A rule change within one week? Guess that rule was as good as (Marquette) Gold.
Nicely done.
-
I love that people care so much about a rule that impacts maybe 5 sports agents in the US.
I'm guessing the rule was a bad rule since they changed it so quickly. You seem very passionate about this issue so I congratulate you for being on the right side of the argument.
So, what now? Has your lot in life changed? Have the fortunes on MU basketball been improved? Will college basketball fans see a better product on the floor?
For a guy who doesn’t care a lot about this issue, you sure are posting a lot in this topic.
-
Yeah. The NCAA ends up with egg on their face after a decision.
Some more breaking news, the Pope is Catholic.
Actually, he is a Jesuit.
-
Actually, he is a Jesuit.
That's like someone saying you're a Marquette grad and you respond "no I'm a [insert which college within MU] grad"
-
That's like someone saying you're a Marquette grad and you respond "no I'm a [insert which college within MU] grad"
It's a joke young lad.
-
It's a joke young lad.
Gotcha sorry for not giving you more credit. Sadly in these times you never know
-
For a guy who doesn’t care a lot about this issue, you sure are posting a lot in this topic.
I have posted too much, but not directly on the topic but on the response to it. I'm confused by those on this board and in the media who are apparently outraged by the NCAA rule.
The rule has/had an impact on a ridiculously small number of people in the country. My guess is that if LeBron's name was not associated with it, the topic would have no media coverage and zero posts on MUScoop.
I have read and commented on other NCAA related topics on this board in the past. I've enjoyed reading other's positions on a variety of issues like paying players that would have meaningful impacts on MU and the sport as a whole. IMO this topic is way too insignificant for national media articles and internet post on the evils of the NCAA.
Just my opinion and I'll refrain from comment going forward.
-
I have posted too much, but not directly on the topic but on the response to it. I'm confused by those on this board and in the media who are apparently outraged by the NCAA rule.
For the record, not sure how many Scoopers were "outraged" by the rule. I sure wasn't.
It was silly, unnecessary, self-righteous and self-serving, and that made it a legit topic of conversation and derision. That it was deemed a failure in a week's time made it only more silly.
-
silly, unnecessary, self-righteous and self-serving, and that made it a legit topic of conversation and derision.
The rule or your stalker?
-
The rule or your stalker?
I can't possible know who you mean.
-
Me neither.
-
Good op-ed in the Charlotte Observer about the NCAA choosing to ignore recommendations by the Rice Commission and its own academic working group to hold member schools responsible for UNC-style academic fraud.
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/opinion/article233784092.html
-
Mississippi State goes on probation because a tutor did school work for 10 football players and a basketball player.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/27447524/ncaa-places-miss-state-3-years-probation
I don't understand how NCAA can mete out this punishment. Some have contended that academic issues are "beyond the NCAA's jurisdiction" and that's why UNC, which had 100x worse academic fraud, couldn't be punished.
Not being snarky at all here. Seriously trying to understand the difference.
-
Mississippi State goes on probation because a tutor did school work for 10 football players and a basketball player.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/27447524/ncaa-places-miss-state-3-years-probation
I don't understand how NCAA can mete out this punishment. Some have contended that academic issues are "beyond the NCAA's jurisdiction" and that's why UNC, which had 100x worse academic fraud, couldn't be punished.
Not being snarky at all here. Seriously trying to understand the difference.
Well first it was negotiated. Second it was a benefit offered solely to student athletes.
-
Well first it was negotiated. Second it was a benefit offered solely to student athletes.
Thanks.
After creating fake classes specifically to funnel its athletes into, UNC did a nice job covering its arse by also letting non-athletes take the fake classes.
And yes, I see now it was a negotiated punishment. Apparently Mississippi State's administrators are more ethical than UNC? Amazing.
-
Mississippi State goes on probation because a tutor did school work for 10 football players and a basketball player.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/27447524/ncaa-places-miss-state-3-years-probation
I don't understand how NCAA can mete out this punishment. Some have contended that academic issues are "beyond the NCAA's jurisdiction" and that's why UNC, which had 100x worse academic fraud, couldn't be punished.
Not being snarky at all here. Seriously trying to understand the difference.
Is this the big news promised by the NCAA (and Cheeks) to be meted out by the Fall Equinox? Tick tock.
Meanwhile, Rosemary Woods is busy deleting those wiretap recordings. Auburn BB got less/"self-imposed" with a criminal conviction.
-
Mississippi State goes on probation because a tutor did school work for 10 football players and a basketball player.
https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/27447524/ncaa-places-miss-state-3-years-probation
I don't understand how NCAA can mete out this punishment. Some have contended that academic issues are "beyond the NCAA's jurisdiction" and that's why UNC, which had 100x worse academic fraud, couldn't be punished.
Not being snarky at all here. Seriously trying to understand the difference.
If you aren’t being snarky then you are straight being a dolt. You are smarter than this and know the difference between the two.
In terms of how much worse, is there a measurement tool you use?
-
Thanks.
After creating fake classes specifically to funnel its athletes into, UNC did a nice job covering its arse by also letting non-athletes take the fake classes.
And yes, I see now it was a negotiated punishment. Apparently Mississippi State's administrators are more ethical than UNC? Amazing.
Fake. False. Journalistic malpractice
-
Fake. False. Journalistic malpractice
You are a liar, and I will not argue with a troll who exists only to argue. Ignoring.
-
Thanks.
After creating fake classes specifically to funnel its athletes into, UNC did a nice job covering its arse by also letting non-athletes take the fake classes.
And yes, I see now it was a negotiated punishment. Apparently Mississippi State's administrators are more ethical than UNC? Amazing.
I would imagine, if the NCAA could prove UNC created these classes for athletes, and then permitted all students as a way to purely skate around NCAA rules, that UNC athletics would be punished. But that would require a lot of specific evidence
-
I would imagine, if the NCAA could prove UNC created these classes for athletes, and then permitted all students as a way to purely skate around NCAA rules, that UNC athletics would be punished. But that would require a lot of specific evidence
As I said, UNC cheated very well here. Their athletic program wasn't the first to get away with wide-spread academic fraud, and it won't be the last. There are probably similar sham classes for athletes being "taught" right now in U.S. institutions; if they are smart, they will follow the UNC blueprint.
NCAA leaders just recently had a chance to accept the advice of the Rice Commission and take this kind of academic fraud under its purview. They passed. Much easier to turn a blind eye by claiming it's out of their jurisdiction -- which makes it easier for them to concentrate on keeping athlete-students from making a nickel on their likenesses.
-
As I said, UNC cheated very well here. Their athletic program wasn't the first to get away with wide-spread academic fraud, and it won't be the last. There are probably similar sham classes for athletes being "taught" right now in U.S. institutions; if they are smart, they will follow the UNC blueprint.
NCAA leaders just recently had a chance to accept the advice of the Rice Commission and take this kind of academic fraud under its purview. They passed. Much easier to turn a blind eye by claiming it's out of their jurisdiction -- which makes it easier for them to concentrate on keeping athlete-students from making a nickel on their likenesses.
Then blame the member institutions, of which you are an alum.
This will get you started...you're retired, you have time on your hand.
https://www.amazon.com/Protest-Postcards-Write-Stamp-Heard/dp/1250169755/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=protest+kit&qid=1566673861&s=gateway&sr=8-3
-
Then blame the member institutions, of which you are an alum.
This will get you started...you're retired, you have time on your hand.
https://www.amazon.com/Protest-Postcards-Write-Stamp-Heard/dp/1250169755/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=protest+kit&qid=1566673861&s=gateway&sr=8-3
Ignoring the troll
-
You are a liar, and I will not argue with a troll who exists only to argue. Ignoring.
How am I lying? Read the report the NCAA put out along with several investigative reports from others. You said classes were created SPECIFICALLY for student athletes. This is FALSE. The classes were originally created where ZERO athletes were even in them. Over time, yes they became destinations for student athletes and OTHER students to enroll in, but they were not created specifically for this purpose. That is false, fake, journalistic malpractice.
-
How am I lying? Read the report the NCAA put out along with several investigative reports from others. You said classes were created SPECIFICALLY for student athletes. This is FALSE. The classes were originally created where ZERO athletes were even in them. Over time, yes they became destinations for student athletes and OTHER students to enroll in, but they were not created specifically for this purpose. That is false, fake, journalistic malpractice.
Ignoring the lying troll.
-
https://thebiglead.com/2019/09/14/nba-agents-ncaa-certification-letter/
NBA agents are refusing to participate in NCAA certification since it apparently gives the NCAA investigory power over the agents.
-
https://thebiglead.com/2019/09/14/nba-agents-ncaa-certification-letter/
NBA agents are refusing to participate in NCAA certification since it apparently gives the NCAA investigory power over the agents.
Wouldn’t want that.....
-
Wouldn’t want that.....
Check back in a week...the NCAA promised us BIG news by then. If they prove they can handle that, then we can give them a promotion to NBA agents. Until then, maybe they can hire Duke's law firm?
-
So yet again, the NCAA comes off caring more about its regulatory environment than it does the welfare of student athletes.
-
So yet again, the NCAA comes off caring more about its regulatory environment than it does the welfare of student athletes.
God forbid someone get into the business of the moral high ground that agents currently reside in. And I say that as someone that deals with them all the time...some of them are excellent, but let’s not kid ourselves that profession has had its share of heavily squirmy reps.
-
God forbid someone get into the business of the moral high ground that agents currently reside in. And I say that as someone that deals with them all the time...some of them are excellent, but let’s not kid ourselves that profession has had its share or heavily squirmy reps.
Yes so let’s have the purity that is the NCAA determine which ones can consult with student athletes. 🙄
-
Yes so let’s have the purity that is the NCAA determine which ones can consult with student athletes. 🙄
So the better answer is to just let the agents do whatever they want.....got it...
-
So the better answer is to just let the agents do whatever they want.....got it...
Never said that. Very dishonest of you per usual.
-
Never said that. Very dishonest of you per usual.
I shouldn't ask about this because it impacts a stupidly small number players and a few sports agents, but here goes..
Serious question. You don't want the NCAA regulating the agents of college players, you don't think the the agents should be regulate themselves, so who sets the rules? Federal government?
-
I shouldn't ask about this because it impacts a stupidly small number players and a few sports agents, but here goes..
Serious question. You don't want the NCAA regulating the agents of college players, you don't think the the agents should be regulate themselves, so who sets the rules? Federal government?
The NBPA already has a process to certify agents. How about inviting them to the table to figure out the best way of making sure everyone is aware of the NCAA’s rules?
-
The NBPA already has a process to certify agents. How about inviting them to the table to figure out the best way of making sure everyone is aware of the NCAA’s rules?
Seems reasonable.
-
The NBPA already has a process to certify agents. How about inviting them to the table to figure out the best way of making sure everyone is aware of the NCAA’s rules?
Does make sense but do you think the NBPA wants any part of this? What do they have to gain?
-
The NBPA already has a process to certify agents. How about inviting them to the table to figure out the best way of making sure everyone is aware of the NCAA’s rules?
The NCAA process is essentially identical to the NBPA process. The only difference is they have to agree to NCAA's investigative authority.
Not including that provision has to be an absolute no go.
-
The NCAA process is essentially identical to the NBPA process. The only difference is they have to agree to NCAA's investigative authority.
Not including that provision has to be an absolute no go.
Why? And why would an agent agree to this?
-
Why? And why would an agent agree to this?
to get clients?
-
Why? And why would an agent agree to this?
If the agent wants to have a shot at signing clients coming out of college they will agree to it.
If they don't, they can shove it. The NCAA has the right to make rules and enforce them. If people don't want to take part, they don't have to. No one owes them crap.
-
If the agent wants to have a shot at signing clients coming out of college they will agree to it.
If they don't, they can shove it. The NCAA has the right to make rules and enforce them. If people don't want to take part, they don't have to. No one owes them crap.
No one said they don't have a right to create the rule and enforce the rule. But I don't understand, and you didn't answer my question, why not including the NCAA's investigative authority is a "no go?"
to get clients?
Well they don't seem that concerned about that since none of the NBPA's certified agents will apparently be participating.
And I hate to break it to you, but contact between agents and potential clients already exists. They're getting the clients regardless.
-
Never said that. Very dishonest of you per usual.
The NCAA should not be allowed to regulate their jurisdiction...that is effectively what you have said by pushing back on them doing just that.
How is that dishonest? What should they be allowed to regulate, only what the agents think is appropriate?
-
If the agent wants to have a shot at signing clients coming out of college they will agree to it.
If they don't, they can shove it. The NCAA has the right to make rules and enforce them. If people don't want to take part, they don't have to. No one owes them crap.
Exactly!!!!!
-
Well they don't seem that concerned about that since none of the NBPA's certified agents will apparently be participating.
And I hate to break it to you, but contact between agents and potential clients already exists. They're getting the clients regardless.
That may be the case, but they will be getting them later than they want. I also got news for you, at least one if not more agents will agree with the NCAA and when that happens, those agents will get first dibs. Some of the less powerful agents will see this as an opportunity.
I’m sorry you thought my response was dishonest, but it sure feels like you are taking the agents side on this. There is only one issue to contend with otherwise the criteria is exactly the same. As such, you are effectively saying let the agents do what they want and win that one issue.
-
The NCAA should not be allowed to regulate their jurisdiction...that is effectively what you have said by pushing back on them doing just that.
1. I never said the NCAA should not be allowed to do anything. The NCAA can do whatever it wants, even if it's misguided and doesn't serve the interest of student athletes.
2. I never said agents should be able to do whatever they want. Which was your original lie.
-
That may be the case, but they will be getting them later than they want. I also got news for you, at least one if not more agents will agree with the NCAA and when that happens, those agents will get first dibs. Some of the less powerful agents will see this as an opportunity.
Those agents would be breaking ranks with the NBPA, which controls the certification process.
I’m sorry you thought my response was dishonest, but it sure feels like you are taking the agents side on this. There is only one issue to contend with otherwise the criteria is exactly the same. As such, you are effectively saying let the agents do what they want and win that one issue.
No. The problem is that you view this as one of "sides," instead of working together to solve the problem at hand. If the NCAA was truly interested in engaging agents in helping to advise basketball players who are "testing the waters," they wouldn't have unilaterally created rules, including the moronic bachelor's degree rule that they quickly backed down on, and subjected agents who certify to their ridiculous investigory powers. They could have sat down with the NBPA and its agents to develop a system that helps give the students athletes advice, while still protecting their NCAA eligibility.
The NCAA seems to think that it has some sort of power to wield, when it really doesn't. Or, and this is what I believe is the case, they are more interested in enforcing their anachronistic rules on amateurism rather than helping student athletes.
If you read the agents' letter, they actually state they are willing to work with the NCAA on this, and make three points:
1. They agree with the NCAA's bi-annnual rules seminar
2. They will not participate in the NCAA's "certification process" since one already exists. (This makes perfect sense to me.)
3. They want to pay for their client's housing and transportation during the "testing the waters" process. (I know...AMATEURISM!!!)
This really shouldn't be a confrontational process, but the NCAA has made it one.
-
Those agents would be breaking ranks with the NBPA, which controls the certification process.
No. The problem is that you view this as one of "sides," instead of working together to solve the problem at hand. If the NCAA was truly interested in engaging agents in helping to advise basketball players who are "testing the waters," they wouldn't have unilaterally created rules, including the moronic bachelor's degree rule that they quickly backed down on, and subjected agents who certify to their ridiculous investigory powers. They could have sat down with the NBPA and its agents to develop a system that helps give the students athletes advice, while still protecting their NCAA eligibility.
The NCAA seems to think that it has some sort of power to wield, when it really doesn't. Or, and this is what I believe is the case, they are more interested in enforcing their anachronistic rules on amateurism rather than helping student athletes.
If you read the agents' letter, they actually state they are willing to work with the NCAA on this, and make three points:
1. They agree with the NCAA's bi-annnual rules seminar
2. They will not participate in the NCAA's "certification process" since one already exists. (This makes perfect sense to me.)
3. They want to pay for their client's housing and transportation during the "testing the waters" process. (I know...AMATEURISM!!!)
This really shouldn't be a confrontational process, but the NCAA has made it one.
NCAA poohbahs are seeing their power and influence slowly eroding, and they are getting desperate. They haven't been about doing what's right for the athlete/students for many decades now.
-
No one said they don't have a right to create the rule and enforce the rule. But I don't understand, and you didn't answer my question, why not including the NCAA's investigative authority is a "no go?"
Well they don't seem that concerned about that since none of the NBPA's certified agents will apparently be participating.
And I hate to break it to you, but contact between agents and potential clients already exists. They're getting the clients regardless.
posturing by the agents now. What may happen is the attorney agents who do not follow this rule and contact clients, may face disciplinary action by their state boards
-
1. I never said the NCAA should not be allowed to do anything. The NCAA can do whatever it wants, even if it's misguided and doesn't serve the interest of student athletes.
2. I never said agents should be able to do whatever they want. Which was your original lie.
It wasn’t a lie....if you understand the issue you would know it isn’t.
There is only one issue of contention between NCAA and the agents. Just one. And it is binary. By saying the ncaa is wrong it needs to work with the agents on this is saying the ncaa shouldn’t be allowed to force this requirement. What is there to negotiate or come to the table on? This issue is a yes or no, there is nothing to negotiate.
I’d be curious to know what you think the middle ground would be here. That the ncaa can only halfway investigate? It’s a serious question....i’m sorry you feel the need to throw the lie allegation, Sultan...it appears to me you simply don’t understand the issue of contention on this one.
-
NCAA poohbahs are seeing their power and influence slowly eroding, and they are getting desperate. They haven't been about doing what's right for the athlete/students for many decades now.
Another terribly broad and irresponsible comment by the “journalist”. Yup, all those athletes that benefited from the system for years and years were actually not benefited. Good Lord.
-
posturing by the agents now. What may happen is the attorney agents who do not follow this rule and contact clients, may face disciplinary action by their state boards
I very much doubt state licensing boards are going to bother trying to discipline anyone for violating an arbitrary NCAA rule.
-
posturing by the agents now. What may happen is the attorney agents who do not follow this rule and contact clients, may face disciplinary action by their state boards
Possible...of course you don’t have to be an attorney to be an agent.
-
It wasn’t a lie....if you understand the issue you would know it isn’t.
There is only one issue of contention between NCAA and the agents. Just one. And it is binary. By saying the ncaa is wrong it needs to work with the agents on this is saying the ncaa shouldn’t be allowed to force this requirement. What is there to negotiate or come to the table on? This issue is a yes or no, there is nothing to negotiate.
I’d be curious to know what you think the middle ground would be here. That the ncaa can only halfway investigate? It’s a serious question....i’m sorry you feel the need to throw the lie allegation, Sultan...it appears to me you simply don’t understand the issue of contention on this one.
LOL. Right. I don't understand. ::) ::)
Anyway, I have explained my thoughts on this in other posts. The NCAA is perfectly free and able to require whatever it wants. It's just not going to help anyone when the agents say "no thanks."
-
Another terribly broad and irresponsible comment by the “journalist”. Yup, all those athletes that benefited from the system for years and years were actually not benefited. Good Lord.
The fact "the system" has benefited athletes doesn't mean that benefiting students is the NCAA's primary concern. It's simply a byproduct of the NCAA's true purpose: enriching its membership. It's like arguing that Walmart's true purpose is to provide income to workers.
Note: there's nothing wrong with the NCAA existing to enrich its membership. It's just hypocritical for its leaders to deny the organization's true purpose and it's gullible for anyone to believe their denials.
-
I very doubt state licensing boards are going to bother trying to discipline anyone for violating an arbitrary NCAA rule.
I dont doubt it. Doesnt matter if you thinks its arbitrary, or the attorney agent does, a rule is a rule, if it is reported, they will follow up
-
I dont doubt it. Doesnt matter if you thinks its arbitrary, or the attorney agent does, a rule is a rule, if it is reported, they will follow up
Attorney licensing boards aren't in the business of enforcing other organizations' rules just because the rules exist.
Do you also believe such boards impose sanctions when a lawyer violates his condominium association's landscaping rules? Or maybe doesn't wipe down the machines at the health club?
Headline: "Lawyer disbarred for not following 90 degree rule at country club."
-
Attorney licensing boards aren't in the business of enforcing other organizations' rules just because the rules exist.
Do you also believe such boards impose sanctions when a lawyer violates his condominium association's landscaping rules? Or maybe doesn't wipe down the machines at the health club?
Headline: "Lawyer disbarred for not following 90 degree rule at country club."
TBH, they should be
-
Attorney licensing boards aren't in the business of enforcing other organizations' rules just because the rules exist.
Do you also believe such boards impose sanctions when a lawyer violates his condominium association's landscaping rules? Or maybe doesn't wipe down the machines at the health club?
Headline: "Lawyer disbarred for not following 90 degree rule at country club."
you are being obtuse. IF an attorney is not allowed to contact a specified class of people and does so anyway, that calls into their fitness to practice law. Especially if that person now becomes ineligible
-
Another terribly broad and irresponsible comment by the “journalist”. Yup, all those athletes that benefited from the system for years and years were actually not benefited. Good Lord.
Ignoring the lying troll.
-
you are being obtuse. IF an attorney is not allowed to contact a specified class of people and does so anyway, that calls into their fitness to practice law. Especially if that person now becomes ineligible
I'm not being obtuse. you're being ridiculous about the powers of the NCAA. "Not allowed to contact?"
Do you honestly believe the NCAA has the authority - authority that will be backed up by state supreme courts - to bar lawyers from speaking to potential adult clients? From where does this authority come, exactly? The NCAA has ZERO jurisdiction over who a lawyer contacts.
-
Yes. Its attorney malpractice if that attorney causes the athlete to lose his eligibility.
-
Yes. Its attorney malpractice if that attorney causes the athlete to lose his eligibility.
No it's not.
This is dumb. I'm done.
-
LOL. Right. I don't understand. ::) ::)
Anyway, I have explained my thoughts on this in other posts. The NCAA is perfectly free and able to require whatever it wants. It's just not going to help anyone when the agents say "no thanks."
With all due respect, you are a smart guy, a good poster, I enjoy reading most of your stuff....I think you just missed what the issue is on this one. My opinion based on what the difference is as I understand it between the two sides.
-
The fact "the system" has benefited athletes doesn't mean that benefiting students is the NCAA's primary concern. It's simply a byproduct of the NCAA's true purpose: enriching its membership. It's like arguing that Walmart's true purpose is to provide income to workers.
Note: there's nothing wrong with the NCAA existing to enrich its membership. It's just hypocritical for its leaders to deny the organization's true purpose and it's gullible for anyone to believe their denials.
And in my opinion, having actually worked in two major college athletic departments, the ncaa benefits most student athletes.
We will disagree on the purpose and I don’t think it is gullible. What I think is gullible and flat out wrong is to continue to paint the entire ncaa based on two revenue sports....or worse, based on a subset of two revenue sports. It’s as if everything else the ncaa does is forgotten or ignored for convenience because it doesn’t fit the meme.
-
No it's not.
This is dumb. I'm done.
you might want to read the rules of professional conduct. If it weren't the case, attorney would be contacting players out in the open now. Attorneys know it is against the NCAA rules currently, which would show the attorney's character and fitness (or lack thereof). Go ahead, contact Markus now as an attorney, and see how fast you are called to the carpet.
-
Ignoring the lying troll.
Lol. Seek help....apparently a lobotomy is in order to remove my residency in your head.
-
Lol. Seek help....apparently a lobotomy is in order to remove my residency in your head.
Ignoring the lying troll.
-
Ignoring the lying troll.
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/lowres.cartoonstock.com/office-positive-positive_thinking-positive_attitudes-successful-self_motivation-bve0103_low.jpg)
-
And in my opinion, having actually worked in two major college athletic departments, the ncaa benefits most student athletes.
We will disagree on the purpose and I don’t think it is gullible. What I think is gullible and flat out wrong is to continue to paint the entire ncaa based on two revenue sports....or worse, based on a subset of two revenue sports. It’s as if everything else the ncaa does is forgotten or ignored for convenience because it doesn’t fit the meme.
Well said.
Reminds me of how the media tries to define the entire Catholic church based upon the hideous actions of a small percentage of priests.
-
Well said.
Reminds me of how the media tries to define the entire Catholic church based upon the hideous actions of a small percentage of priests.
Yup. But that is how people are. Ignore the missionary work, the educational system, the hospitals, charities, etc....none of that matters. For the ncaa, even worse because quite frankly even if you think these kids should be compensated, the ncaa provides them enormous value simply by providing a platform for which these kids can even make the compensation claim to begin with. These kids didn’t build Michigan Stadium, or FF, or the Marquette gym for that matter.....but they deserve a cut by golly..... :o
-
And in my opinion, having actually worked in two major college athletic departments, the ncaa benefits most student athletes.
We will disagree on the purpose and I don’t think it is gullible. What I think is gullible and flat out wrong is to continue to paint the entire ncaa based on two revenue sports....or worse, based on a subset of two revenue sports. It’s as if everything else the ncaa does is forgotten or ignored for convenience because it doesn’t fit the meme.
You continue to excel at inserting no one made and then shooting them down.
No one had said college sports doesn't benefit most of its participants. No one has said has said the entire NCAA is based on two revenue sports.
But any benefit derived by participants is secondary to the NCAA's intent, not the primary purpose. Like my Walmart analogy, it's true that some people benefit by working for Walmart. But Walmart doesn't exist to benefit those people. It exists to make money for its owners. Likewise, some athletes benefit by playing NCAA sports. But the NCAA doesn't exist to help those athletes. It exists to make money for its members.
And while no one has said the NCAA is solely football and men's hoops, those two sports certainly are the primary drivers of NCAA revenue and, I would bet the farm, the primary beneficiary of expenditures. So it's misleading to insinuate that the NCAA is about field hockey and D3 softball as much as it is about football and basketball.
-
You continue to excel at inserting no one made and then shooting them down.
No one had said college sports doesn't benefit most of its participants. No one has said has said the entire NCAA is based on two revenue sports.
But any benefit derived by participants is secondary to the NCAA's intent, not the primary purpose. Like my Walmart analogy, it's true that some people benefit by working for Walmart. But Walmart doesn't exist to benefit those people. It exists to make money for its owners. Likewise, some athletes benefit by playing NCAA sports. But the NCAA doesn't exist to help those athletes. It exists to make money for its members.
And while no one has said the NCAA is solely football and men's hoops, those two sports certainly are the primary drivers of NCAA revenue and, I would bet the farm, the primary beneficiary of expenditures. So it's misleading to insinuate that the NCAA is about field hockey and D3 softball as much as it is about football and basketball.
Well said
-
You continue to excel at inserting no one made and then shooting them down.
No one had said college sports doesn't benefit most of its participants. No one has said has said the entire NCAA is based on two revenue sports.
But any benefit derived by participants is secondary to the NCAA's intent, not the primary purpose. Like my Walmart analogy, it's true that some people benefit by working for Walmart. But Walmart doesn't exist to benefit those people. It exists to make money for its owners. Likewise, some athletes benefit by playing NCAA sports. But the NCAA doesn't exist to help those athletes. It exists to make money for its members.
And while no one has said the NCAA is solely football and men's hoops, those two sports certainly are the primary drivers of NCAA revenue and, I would bet the farm, the primary beneficiary of expenditures. So it's misleading to insinuate that the NCAA is about field hockey and D3 softball as much as it is about football and basketball.
Your Walmart analogy is so absurd of a comparison it is troubling. Absolutely troubling and I don’t see how you get there at all...it is that bad. Walmart is a for profit corporation with that as its primary goal. The ncaa is not a for profit entity, it is not a corporation, it’s primary goal is not in any way, shape or form from its very origins to be anything of the kind. The ncaa is a Rule making body, among other roles it serves. If it was as you suggested in your absurd comparison, why is it that the rules force schools to have a min of 14 sports, over 90% that don’t make money? Your analogy, counselor, how is it in the ballpark?
All student athletes benefit from the ncaa, the issue is not that they do, but whether they do enough according to you. Even in your wildest anti ncaa dreams, kids are being taught, they are given instruction, they are fed, clothed, provided a roof over their head....those are all benefits...and they are taxed on none of it. Again, your Walmart example is simply not the same.
As for your “no one said claims”....also patently ridiculous. Of course people have said it. Here, elsewhere....the amount of people on this board that don’t even understand what the association is and it’s role, or MU’s membership within that association is troubling.
The nCAa benefits far far far far more athletes not playing football or basketball and it isn’t even in the ballpark for discussion. In addition to the ncaa benefiting basketball and football players in any number of ways, the hundreds of thousands non-football and non-basketball players benefited by the ncaa, including softball, field hockey, etc, absolutely dwarfs those other two sports. This is factually true and easily proven.
-
But any benefit derived by participants is secondary to the NCAA's intent, not the primary purpose. Like my Walmart analogy, it's true that some people benefit by working for Walmart. But Walmart doesn't exist to benefit those people. It exists to make money for its owners. Likewise, some athletes benefit by playing NCAA sports. But the NCAA doesn't exist to help those athletes. It exists to make money for its members.
This is a good but not great analogy. Walmart has a responsibility to its shareholders to maximize profits and for its board or officers to do otherwise would be a dereliction of their fiduciary responsibilities.
If the NCAA had the same responsibility to its members, it would be negligent in its responsibilities by not eliminating all non-revenue spots at all levels.
-
Well said.
Reminds me of how the media tries to define the entire Catholic church based upon the hideous actions of a small percentage of priests.
The problem isn't just the "hideous actions of a small percentage of priests," it's how the nstitution systematically covered it up. And how that cover up has lead people to distrust the Church and completely overshaddow the genuine good it has done.
So in many ways this is a perfect analogy to the NCAA. An institution that can't get out of its own way and overvalues its process and rules.
-
The problem isn't just the "hideous actions of a small percentage of priests," it's how the nstitution systematically covered it up. And how that cover up has lead people to distrust the Church and completely overshaddow the genuine good it has done.
So in many ways this is a perfect analogy to the NCAA. An institution that can't get out of its own way and overvalues its process and rules.
This. Exactly.
-
This is a good but not great analogy. Walmart has a responsibility to its shareholders to maximize profits and for its board or officers to do otherwise would be a dereliction of their fiduciary responsibilities.
If the NCAA had the same responsibility to its members, it would be negligent in its responsibilities by not eliminating all non-revenue spots at all levels.
1. Title IX.
2. Again, no one is saying enriching its members is the only purpose of the NCAA.
-
Your Walmart analogy is so absurd of a comparison it is troubling. Absolutely troubling and I don’t see how you get there at all...it is that bad. Walmart is a for profit corporation with that as its primary goal. The ncaa is not a for profit entity, it is not a corporation,
An analogy is not a simile.
-
The problem isn't just the "hideous actions of a small percentage of priests," it's how the nstitution systematically covered it up. And how that cover up has lead people to distrust the Church and completely overshaddow the genuine good it has done.
So in many ways this is a perfect analogy to the NCAA. An institution that can't get out of its own way and overvalues its process and rules.
Are you describing gov't Sultan or something else?
-
1. Title IX.
2. Again, no one is saying enriching its members is the only purpose of the NCAA.
No one? Oh really....I'll give you a day to retract and correct that....I'll give you a few hints, there are people on this board in just the last 15 days that have said it serves only one purpose, which is to do what you just said they don't say. But yeah..."no one"
-
An analogy is not a simile.
An analogy should also have at least a few kernels of relative comparison, yours does not.....other than human beings are involved in both Walmart and the NCAA.
-
An analogy is not a simile.
It's still a terrible analogy. The two are not similar in significant respects.
There was a statement that the NCAA's purpose is to enrich its members. That is false. It is an opinion of some people, but it is not a statement of fact.
Similarly the Catholic Church analogy is horrendous. The NCAA isn't covering anything up. They may do a piss poor job of investigation/enforcement, but that is more because they have little to no actual legal recourse.
Several on here are going to absurd arguments because of an implicit bias against the NCAA. It's fine to hate the NCAA, but no one is helping their stance when they make absurd claims.
-
Your Walmart analogy is so absurd of a comparison it is troubling. Absolutely troubling and I don’t see how you get there at all...it is that bad. Walmart is a for profit corporation with that as its primary goal. The ncaa is not a for profit entity, it is not a corporation, it’s primary goal is not in any way, shape or form from its very origins to be anything of the kind.
The NCAA is a not-for-profit entity because it is a membership organization that passes along profits to it members. Not because it engages in an altruistic function.
-
It's still a terrible analogy. The two are not similar in significant respects.
There was a statement that the NCAA's purpose is to enrich its members. That is false. It is an opinion of some people, but it is not a statement of fact.
So how can it be false if it's an opinion? There is no certain truth that it's primary purpose isn't to enrich its members. (And yes the Catholic Church analogy is very much a stretch - one that White Trash and Cheeks brought up to actually defend in the NCAA. Which is someone laughtable.)
-
So how can it be false if it's an opinion? There is no certain truth that it's primary purpose isn't to enrich its members. (And yes the Catholic Church analogy is very much a stretch - one that White Trash and Cheeks brought up to actually defend in the NCAA. Which is someone laughtable.)
When it was used in an analogy (to justify it as a good analogy), it is being used as a statement of fact. That is false, it is an opinion.
An opinion being a central element of an analogy, makes it a poor analogy.
-
It's still a terrible analogy. The two are not similar in significant respects.
It's not, and the NCAA does not have to be the same as Walmart for the analogy to hold. You're just not understanding what an analogy is and how one works.
As for the rest of your post, the argument that one should discount anti-NCAA arguments because they come from people who don't like the NCAA is very bad. Who else is going to make anti-NCAA arguments, exactly? Not the people who carry its water here and elsewhere.
-
So how can it be false if it's an opinion? There is no certain truth that it's primary purpose isn't to enrich its members. (And yes the Catholic Church analogy is very much a stretch - one that White Trash and Cheeks brought up to actually defend in the NCAA. Which is someone laughtable.)
You need to reread the context of the Catholic Church analogy. It was in no way, shape or form intended to defend the NCAA.
I welcome comments or criticisms of my positions (I can be wrong often), but labeling my position as 'laughable' for something I did not even come close to saying is hard to swallow.
-
1. Title IX.
2. Again, no one is saying enriching its members is the only purpose of the NCAA.
1. This does not address the NCAA's continued support of non-revenue men's sports.
2. I said it a good not great analogy. A publicly traded for-profit company must maximize its profits. The NCAA by is very nature and mission does not.
-
You need to reread the context of the Catholic Church analogy. It was in no way, shape or form intended to defend the NCAA.
I welcome comments or criticisms of my positions (I can be wrong often), but labeling my position as 'laughable' for something I did not even come close to saying is hard to swallow.
You are correct that my statement was a little harsh.
-
You are correct that my statement was a little harsh.
It's cool. These threads get a bit overwhelming with all the posts. Totally understandable. Thanks for acknowledging it.
-
1. This does not address the NCAA's continued support of non-revenue men's sports.
2. I said it a good not great analogy. A publicly traded for-profit company must maximize its profits. The NCAA by is very nature and mission does not.
This is why it's an analogy not a simile. I'm not arguing the NCAA = Walmart.
And this really need not devolve into a pedantic debate over literary devices.
-
The problem isn't just the "hideous actions of a small percentage of priests," it's how the nstitution systematically covered it up. And how that cover up has lead people to distrust the Church and completely overshaddow the genuine good it has done.
So in many ways this is a perfect analogy to the NCAA. An institution that can't get out of its own way and overvalues its process and rules.
Winner Winner
-
This. Exactly.
Absurd. Patently absurd. There is nothing even remotely comparable.
-
It's still a terrible analogy. The two are not similar in significant respects.
There was a statement that the NCAA's purpose is to enrich its members. That is false. It is an opinion of some people, but it is not a statement of fact.
Similarly the Catholic Church analogy is horrendous. The NCAA isn't covering anything up. They may do a piss poor job of investigation/enforcement, but that is more because they have little to no actual legal recourse.
Several on here are going to absurd arguments because of an implicit bias against the NCAA. It's fine to hate the NCAA, but no one is helping their stance when they make absurd claims.
100% in agreement
-
So how can it be false if it's an opinion? There is no certain truth that it's primary purpose isn't to enrich its members. (And yes the Catholic Church analogy is very much a stretch - one that White Trash and Cheeks brought up to actually defend in the NCAA. Which is someone laughtable.)
Excuse me......I didn’t bring it up....I responded to someone who did to show how people here continue to paint with a massive broad brush.
That didn’t stop others from saying ncaa = Catholic Church
Patently absurd comparison. Just as the Walmart example is tremendously weak.
-
Winner Winner
The irony is about as delicious as one can get