Crowder & Hayward to HOF

[Nukem2]

Family members aren’t tied to the kids?  And again, how often is this happening, to the 1%.

Get rid of the one and done, let these 1%’ers go directly to the show, force these NBA GMs to actually evaluate talent and watch how many of them strike out.  Others can go to the G League, and some will.  I suspect a lot of families will talk to their kids and say life is about choices, no different than high school baseball players do now.  Some go into the draft and some go to college.  I would much prefer it go this way to clean up the nonsense.

Yup.  All this stuff about likenesses is just gobbledygook.  College BB is really no different than than Baseball or FB if the NBA gets its act together.  No one is talking about likenesses for those two sports.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Yup.  All this stuff about likenesses is just gobbledygook.  College BB is really no different than than Baseball or FB if the NBA gets its act together.  No one is talking about likenesses for those two sports.

They most certainly are in football.

[Nukem2]

They most certainly are in football.

Yeah, that 84th guy on the roster might get a free popsicle...

[MU82]

Mike,

Are you equating college sports with coal mining?  I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that the families of deceased miners “might” not see it the same way. 

After all, playing a sport in exchange for a free college education is the same as having to work in a coal mine for 40 years, or until it kills you.

I was just spitballing, chili, and most certainly was not equating college sports with coal mining.

I just am not a fan of, "Well, if you don't like the NCAA's rules, you could choose to do something else." It seems like a very weak argument to me.

So if you don't like something, rather than try to advocate for change, you should quit and do something else? Love it or leave it?

Maybe I'm not articulating my point well, but I agree with most of the stuff TAMU and brew have said. To me, it simply seems strange that quite a few people here are against Americans -- any Americans -- being able to be in charge of their own likeness.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Yup.  All this stuff about likenesses is just gobbledygook.  College BB is really no different than than Baseball or FB if the NBA gets its act together.  No one is talking about likenesses for those two sports.

So what's the problem with allowing it?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Yeah, that 84th guy on the roster might get a free popsicle...

???  That's not even the point you brought up.  You said "no one is talking about likenesses" in baseball or football.  It most certainly is the case with football. Much of this debate was started when EA Sports stopped producing its college football video game ue to licensing concerns.

[Cheeks]

I was just spitballing, chili, and most certainly was not equating college sports with coal mining.

I just am not a fan of, "Well, if you don't like the NCAA's rules, you could choose to do something else." It seems like a very weak argument to me.

So if you don't like something, rather than try to advocate for change, you should quit and do something else? Love it or leave it?

Maybe I'm not articulating my point well, but I agree with most of the stuff TAMU and brew have said. To me, it simply seems strange that quite a few people here are against Americans -- any Americans -- being able to be in charge of their own likeness.

Isn’t that what some of us are asking you to do?  Advocate for change starting with your alma mater, a member of the NCAA. You have time on your hands, start advocating.

[MU82]

Isn’t that what some of us are asking you to do?  Advocate for change starting with your alma mater, a member of the NCAA. You have time on your hands, start advocating.

Ignoring.

[GooooMarquette]

I think it's great that Crowder and Hayward got into the MU HOF.

[Cheeks]

They can control their likeness all they want, but not sell it while student athletes.  If that is most important to them, quit and they can sell their likeness all they want.  Meanwhile, they have Instagram, Facebook, Snap, etc, and control their likeness as any other kid their age....putting it out there for all to see.

Yup, rules exist for certain people and not for others.  I pay more taxes then others...life isn’t fair.  My mom is not allowed to drive because she has Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s...life isn’t fair.  A 40 year old can run for President, a 23 year old cannot....life is unfair.  The list is endless.  A majority regular students would kill for the unfair opportunities student athletes are given....life is unfair.

[Cheeks]

I think it's great that Crowder and Hayward got into the MU HOF.

I think it’s great your political statements below your name are allowed despite no politics on this board.

[wadesworld]

Ignoring.

But in reality it should read "drawing attention to."

"Ignoring" would be...well, ignoring the post.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Yup, rules exist for certain people and not for others.  I pay more taxes then others...life isn’t fair.  My mom is not allowed to drive because she has Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s...life isn’t fair.  A 40 year old can run for President, a 23 year old cannot....life is unfair.  The list is endless.

You keep trotting out logical fallacies. You have yet to offer one reason why student athletes shouldn't be able to profit off their likeness. You just keep repeating logical fallacies and saying life isn't fair. That isn't a reason, that is a justification. I can think of reasons all those other examples are rules. What is your reason for banning athletes from profiting off their likeness?

A majority regular students would kill for the unfair opportunities student athletes are given....life is unfair.

But the opportunities aren't unfair. They are earned. Except in Lori Laughlin situations, student athletes have worked hard to put themselves in a position to earn athletic scholarships and all the benefits that come along. The majority of "regular students" had the same opportunity to earn those scholarships, but they didn't put in the work.

And again, this has nothing to do with students profiting off their likeness.

[GooooMarquette]

I think it’s great your political statements below your name are allowed despite no politics on this board.

It’s actually an economic statement, but do you disagree with it?

[brewcity77]

It’s actually an economic statement, but do you disagree with it?

I can see how someone viewing it would interpret it as having political implications. Just like the person who pointed out your statement has a statement below his own name that is purely there for political purposes. Isn't hypocrisy great?

[Lennys Tap]

My mom is not allowed to drive because she has Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s...life isn’t fair. 

Your position is when life is unfair, tough shyte. Others say, when life is unfair, to the extent you can, fix it.

I would rather have us seek cures/preventions for things like Parkinson's and Alzheimer's - so that we might eliminate those (and other) examples of "unfairness".

I think your "tough shyte, life is unfair" attitude is cruel and stupid.

[The Equalizer]

You keep trotting out logical fallacies. You have yet to offer one reason why student athletes shouldn't be able to profit off their likeness. You just keep repeating logical fallacies and saying life isn't fair. That isn't a reason, that is a justification. I can think of reasons all those other examples are rules. What is your reason for banning athletes from profiting off their likeness?

Here are a few ideas why permitting student athletes to sell their likeness might be a bad idea:

1. You wind up giving schools built-in advantages based on area population or national following to include pitches like "The typical Tar Heel student-athlete generates $1.2 million in personal appearance fees, compared to $800 at Duke, $500K at Clemson, or $250K at South Carolina.  Why would you go to any of those schools?"  Or, "The metro population of Chicago is more than 7 million, versus 1.5 million in Milwaukee.  Think of the expanded personal likeness income opportunity you'll have at DePaul."

2. You wind up legalizing de-facto booster payments to attend the favored school.  Do you really want Phil Knight to buy an all-star team for Oregon via buying the likeness of certain players for Nike?   

3. The ego issues that will arise will make our off-season issues with the Hausers look like nothing.  You think the player egos and complaints about usage are bad now?  Wait until there's a player revenue stream at risk. You'll get players suing their coach for loss of income if their reputation suffers and their likeness is devalued due to lack of playing time, discipline, etc.

The only way I could see this working is if all the revenue is pooled, and every player gets an equal cut, regardless of school.

[Nukem2]

Here are a few ideas why permitting student athletes to sell their likeness might be a bad idea:

1. You wind up giving schools built-in advantages based on area population or national following to include pitches like "The typical Tar Heel student-athlete generates $1.2 million in personal appearance fees, compared to $800 at Duke, $500K at Clemson, or $250K at South Carolina.  Why would you go to any of those schools?"  Or, "The metro population of Chicago is more than 7 million, versus 1.5 million in Milwaukee.  Think of the expanded personal likeness income opportunity you'll have at DePaul."

2. You wind up legalizing de-facto booster payments to attend the favored school.  Do you really want Phil Knight to buy an all-star team for Oregon via buying the likeness of certain players for Nike?   

3. The ego issues that will arise will make our off-season issues with the Hausers look like nothing.  You think the player egos and complaints about usage are bad now?  Wait until there's a player revenue stream at risk. You'll get players suing their coach for loss of income if their reputation suffers and their likeness is devalued due to lack of playing time, discipline, etc.

The only way I could see this working is if all the revenue is pooled, and every player gets an equal cut, regardless of school.

Yep.  The inequities and the possibilities are real issues.  Pandora’s Box......

[Shooter McGavin]

Yep.

And for those who think that all the money will go to the “kids” are fooling themselves.  Much of the money will still go to handlers.  And they will steer the kids to the schools they (the handlers) will make the most money at.  The playing field will be much more uneven for recruiting.

Your solution is theoretically good but will have the same amount or more of the slime it has now.

[Its DJOver]

Theoretical "legal" conversation that could have happened last year if the rules were changed;

"Mr. Oats, Steve Wojciechowski.  How's it going?  Really looking forward to our match-up this year, you got a helluva team, and ya know what, in watching film of you guys it appears that CJ Massinburg is a real star in the making.  It's because of his ability that I've decided to offer him 50K and he's going to transfer to Marquette, you should be hearing from him shortly about it.  You did a great job finding him and developing him, so keep up the good work, and maybe we can have this conversation again some day.  Neither you or the school will receive any compensation for this by the way, because we want the kids to keep everything.  Hope this doesn't screw up your upcoming year.  Thanks.  Steve."

If you think the grad transfer poaching low/mid major players is bad, this would absolutely break it.  And don't think that we would be sitting at the top of the food chain either, because I can all but guarantee that Sean Miller would have had Markus on speed dial upping the offer after every otherworldly performance.  Recruiting would turn into an auction (both at the high school level and on the transfer market) and a LOI would mean nothing.

[brewcity77]

Here are a few ideas why permitting student athletes to sell their likeness might be a bad idea:

1. You wind up giving schools built-in advantages based on area population or national following to include pitches like "The typical Tar Heel student-athlete generates $1.2 million in personal appearance fees, compared to $800 at Duke, $500K at Clemson, or $250K at South Carolina.  Why would you go to any of those schools?"  Or, "The metro population of Chicago is more than 7 million, versus 1.5 million in Milwaukee.  Think of the expanded personal likeness income opportunity you'll have at DePaul."

2. You wind up legalizing de-facto booster payments to attend the favored school.  Do you really want Phil Knight to buy an all-star team for Oregon via buying the likeness of certain players for Nike?   

3. The ego issues that will arise will make our off-season issues with the Hausers look like nothing.  You think the player egos and complaints about usage are bad now?  Wait until there's a player revenue stream at risk. You'll get players suing their coach for loss of income if their reputation suffers and their likeness is devalued due to lack of playing time, discipline, etc.

The only way I could see this working is if all the revenue is pooled, and every player gets an equal cut, regardless of school.

This is all already going on through the shoe companies. Different companies pay different amounts. They steer recruits to their prestige schools. And as far as the last point, that's never happened in the NBA. Seems like one more chicken little worst case scenario.

[Nukem2]

This is all already going on through the shoe companies. Different companies pay different amounts. They steer recruits to their prestige schools. And as far as the last point, that's never happened in the NBA. Seems like one more chicken little worst case scenario.

Will get boosters in on the action now under the guise of corporate veils.  More than Chicken Little.

[Uncle Rico]

Will get boosters in on the action now under the guise of corporate veils.  More than Chicken Little.

Good

[The Equalizer]

This is all already going on through the shoe companies. Different companies pay different amounts. They steer recruits to their prestige schools. And as far as the last point, that's never happened in the NBA. Seems like one more chicken little worst case scenario.

There's a Nike Air Markus shoe?   

[brewcity77]

There's a Nike Air Markus shoe?   

Have you paid any attention to current events in college basketball the past couple years?