Well that was a waste

[Cheeks]

Huh? Go back on your meds, man.

You sound very angry today.

Couldn’t be happier.  What’s it like to only advocate for the 1% and not care about the other student athletes and their dreams?  I cannot relate.

[MU82]

Couldn’t be happier.  What’s it like to only advocate for the 1% and not care about the other student athletes and their dreams?  I cannot relate.

Dribble.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Cool, the student athlete gets benefitsearned compensation those students can only dream of. 

You really need to stop with the compensation envy Chicos

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Couldn’t be happier.  What’s it like to only advocate for the 1% and not care about the other student athletes and their dreams?  I cannot relate.

I am for athletes profiting off their likenesses. I also happen to believe that this will benefit the vast majority of student athletes. Just because you believe that this will lead to the "decimation" of all low/mid majors, private schools, and non-revenue sports doesn't actually make it true.

[Uncle Rico]

I am for athletes profiting off their likenesses. I also happen to believe that this will benefit the vast majority of student athletes. Just because you believe that this will lead to the "decimation" of all low/mid majors, private schools, and non-revenue sports doesn't actually make it true.

It isn’t true.  Every time there has been seismic changes in college athletics, whether it was Title IX, early entry, etc., the Chicken Little league commissioners, athletic directors have all predicted doom and every single time, they’ve been wrong. 

In another thread, Cheeks said Wojo should take another job because other schools will have it easier to succeed.  He’s right but that’s the case today without NIL.

The doom and gloom crowd talk about athletic departments not making money as if that’s relevant to NIL.  Bloated administration and an arms race in paying coaches in all sports isn’t a NIL issue, that’s a societal issue. 

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Remember those couple of days when chicos wasn't pumping out 50 posts a day?  Good times.

[mu03eng]

"College sports isn't about winning and losing"?

Come on, this is going off the rails now.

Ask the fans, players, coaches, bookies, Vegas and online sports books, individual betters if it is about winning and losing. Every single person who buys the tickets and watches or listens to the games, i.e. the entire revenue stream of college sports, is in it for the winning and losing.

Maybe the NCAA can institute a rule that no scores will be kept and everyone gets a blue ribbon. I'm sure the networks and ESPN and Fox Sports will shell out big bucks for that.

And I can only hope when you say 'college sports' above you mean major college basketball and football because I don't think the air rifle or cross-country teams at any school raises the profile and visibility of the institutions.

Never said it wasn't about winning, said there was more too it than that. Why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have football programs? To generate revenue off buy games they are very likely to lose and to raise the visibility of their school within their community and potentially on the national stage from time to time if they get a student who turns into something or if they have a big upset (see Miami of Ohio with Ben Rothlesburger or Appalachian State)

At most 15 schools have the legitimate chance to win a national championship in football yet over 100 universities have a D1 football program, why is that?

[Uncle Rico]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.golf.com/news/features/2019/10/04/division-3-golf-dylan-dethier-ncaa/amp/

The horror

[mu03eng]

LOL. Uhm, they are definitely going to test this in the courts for any number of reasons, including having 10 different states, or 50 states with different versions of insanity.  They are definitely going to take this to the courts as they should.

And they'll go blind on paperwork and/or broke in legal fees fighting this state by state. There will be compromise, the NCAA has to or it will die. That's the funny thing about all the folks talking about the NIL profit concept like it'll be the death of the NCAA.....if they don't do it the NCAA will die. Fair or unfair, society is moving in a direction in which it does not tolerate the inequality of earning potential. The NCAA is artificially limiting the earning potential of it's student athletes and with politicians looking for easy wins bringing the NCAA to heal is an easy win to get.

So those resistant to change, that's fine but if you get your way it will actually be what kills college athletes not those of us who are advocating deliberate and reasonable reforms.

[brewcity77]

You better read your own county and city guidelines on what can and cannot be done in the uniform lieutenant.

Moving goalposts again. You said nothing about "in uniform" in your post.

[brewcity77]

LOL.  Really.  So someone that is blind can be a fireman?  Someone that is 95?  Someone that can lift 15 lbs only?  Nope.  Nope.  Nope.  #HarrisonBergeron

If they can pass a CPAT, yes. It's a standardized test that doesn't discriminate on gender, race, or age. Seriously, stop trying to talk about things you know nothing about. You look like an idiot.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Is this the longest thread not named NM on Scoop not to get locked?

[WhiteTrash]

Never said it wasn't about winning, said there was more too it than that. Why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have football programs? To generate revenue off buy games they are very likely to lose and to raise the visibility of their school within their community and potentially on the national stage from time to time if they get a student who turns into something or if they have a big upset (see Miami of Ohio with Ben Rothlesburger or Appalachian State)

At most 15 schools have the legitimate chance to win a national championship in football yet over 100 universities have a D1 football program, why is that?

I'll try not to twist your words when I quote you word for word.

"Why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have football programs? "

Okay, why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have cross-country programs?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

I'll try not to twist your words when I quote you word for word.

"Why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have football programs? "

Okay, why do you think Eastern Michigan and Utah State and Toledo have cross-country programs?

Cross country is a low cost program, that adds to the sport minimums for each school, and allows schools to balance out the scholarships Title IX wise since football includes so many male scholarships.  Track & Field has 12.6 scholarships for men (which includes cross country), 18 for women.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Remember those couple of days when chicos wasn't pumping out 50 posts a day?  Good times.

Ive advocated for trying to contact a family member and alert them that he is off his meds.
Napolean Complex and schizophrenia it would seem, no psychiatrist tho

[muguru]

And they'll go blind on paperwork and/or broke in legal fees fighting this state by state. There will be compromise, the NCAA has to or it will die. That's the funny thing about all the folks talking about the NIL profit concept like it'll be the death of the NCAA.....if they don't do it the NCAA will die. Fair or unfair, society is moving in a direction in which it does not tolerate the inequality of earning potential. The NCAA is artificially limiting the earning potential of it's student athletes and with politicians looking for easy wins bringing the NCAA to heal is an easy win to get.

So those resistant to change, that's fine but if you get your way it will actually be what kills college athletes not those of us who are advocating deliberate and reasonable reforms.

Society has moved in many different directions over the last 10-15 years. Given those directions they have moved, we shouldn't listen to society on anything. They have made terrible decisions to say the least.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Society has moved in many different directions over the last 10-15 years. Given those directions they have moved, we shouldn't listen to society on anything. They have made terrible decisions to say the least.

Right.  Look at 2016...ah...nevermind.

[WhiteTrash]

Cross country is a low cost program, that adds to the sport minimums for each school, and allows schools to balance out the scholarships Title IX wise since football includes so many male scholarships.  Track & Field has 12.6 scholarships for men (which includes cross country), 18 for women.

So okay, why do they have men's cross-county, track, tennis, etc?

Remember the premise is that college sports are not about winning and losing, only raising the profile of the school.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

So okay, why do they have men's cross-county, track, tennis, etc?

Remember the premise is that college sports are not about winning and losing, only raising the profile of the school.

Because you have to have seven sports for men and seven for women at the D1 level.  Furthermore, since cross country teams usually only go to various local meets before going to a conference meet, those teams can travel together and usually have the same coach for both.

If those sports requirements went away, many schools would drop sports so they could devote as many resources as possible to football and basketball - the ones that bring eyeballs.  One of those sports could be cross country.

[mu03eng]

So okay, why do they have men's cross-county, track, tennis, etc?

Remember the premise is that college sports are not about winning and losing, only raising the profile of the school.

Agree with everything Sultin said.....in addition, having a diverse sports program raises visibility and interest of perspective students. The non-revenue sports *generalization alert* tend to have athletes that are more students because generally they aren't in that sport for a career in that sport. So if you want to raise interest with those that are great students but also athletes you have to meet them where they are. Remember if a coach is out recruiting for cross country at a school he/she is present in the minds of more than just the single athlete they are recruiting. Further, students in high school have athlete friends "Jim got a visit from Marquette to run cross country, I hadn't heard of them but he talked highly of the school, maybe I'll check it out" etc.

Bottom line, one of the main drives for universities around sports is brand awareness.....winning absolutely helps brand awareness but it isn't required.

[mu03eng]

Society has moved in many different directions over the last 10-15 years. Given those directions they have moved, we shouldn't listen to society on anything. They have made terrible decisions to say the least.

But you haven't? And guess what the folks that want things to stay the same how are you so sure you are right cause you are actually in the minority on this one?

[WhiteTrash]

Because you have to have seven sports for men and seven for women at the D1 level.  Furthermore, since cross country teams usually only go to various local meets before going to a conference meet, those teams can travel together and usually have the same coach for both.

If those sports requirements went away, many schools would drop sports so they could devote as many resources as possible to football and basketball - the ones that bring eyeballs.  One of those sports could be cross country.

Fair enough, but why then do the universities require 7 men's and women's sports for DI (also, remember DI was not a qualifier of the statement)? Title IX only addresses women's sports. Why undermine the revenue generating sports with this requirement?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Fair enough, but why then do the universities require 7 men's and women's sports for DI (also, remember DI was not a qualifier of the statement)? Title IX only addresses women's sports. Why undermine the revenue generating sports with this requirement?

My guess is that the NCAA wants it used as a barrier to entry.

[WhiteTrash]

Agree with everything Sultin said.....in addition, having a diverse sports program raises visibility and interest of perspective students. The non-revenue sports *generalization alert* tend to have athletes that are more students because generally they aren't in that sport for a career in that sport. So if you want to raise interest with those that are great students but also athletes you have to meet them where they are. Remember if a coach is out recruiting for cross country at a school he/she is present in the minds of more than just the single athlete they are recruiting. Further, students in high school have athlete friends "Jim got a visit from Marquette to run cross country, I hadn't heard of them but he talked highly of the school, maybe I'll check it out" etc.

Bottom line, one of the main drives for universities around sports is brand awareness.....winning absolutely helps brand awareness but it isn't required.

I agree schools benefit from brand awareness resulting from sports teams. I'm sure they take it into account when making decisions related to sports.

I'm not sure there has been any studies related to the effectiveness of this 'investment ' but if so I'd be interested to see it. My personal belief is the the 1,000+ schools involved in collegiate sports would get a better return on their money from other avenues to brand awareness. But, I feel that there has been a tremendous link between sports and education from grade school through college for a long time and the students and schools get many benefits from the relationship beyond money or self promotion.

It is possible I am too old fashion and naive and that from the Fontbonne University women's tennis team to the Alabama football team this is all a big marketing ploy.
(if so, these student athletes truly are employees)

[mu03eng]

I agree schools benefit from brand awareness resulting from sports teams. I'm sure they take it into account when making decisions related to sports.

I'm not sure there has been any studies related to the effectiveness of this 'investment ' but if so I'd be interested to see it. My personal belief is the the 1,000+ schools involved in collegiate sports would get a better return on their money from other avenues to brand awareness. But, I feel that there has been a tremendous link between sports and education from grade school through college for a long time and the students and schools get many benefits from the relationship beyond money or self promotion.

It is possible I am too old fashion and naive and that from the Fontbonne University women's tennis team to the Alabama football team this is all a big marketing ploy.
(if so, these student athletes truly are employees)

I love college sports more than just about anyone but you will get zero argument from me that it also may be a bad investment for organizations predicated on educating individuals. I think culturally it would be way too much of a shock to the system but if the college sporting system simply disappeared and all financing was re-positioned into the core mission and traditional advertisement of universities I do think the university mission could very well be better off. But we aren't really having a debate of whether or not to kill the current model, we're assuming the current model should be in place but tweaked in somewhat significant ways