• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Alumnus Mit Shah donates $5mil to Wake Forest Basketball

simosfrostyone said:
Why can't the endowment pay for that? And a whole lot of other things, including tuition reduction. What are we saving it for? Answer--nothing. It will never be spent.
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
Is this serious?
Click to expand...

Deacfreak07 said:
lol. Can you define endowment for me?
Click to expand...

Teamramrod said:
Lol bad post
Click to expand...

DCDeac said:
Either a pretty clever joke or a mind-boggling hot take.

Funny either way though.
Click to expand...

wakephan09 said:
Lol, this is incredible. Just quoting one more time.
Click to expand...

WakeBDer said:
Oh dear god. . .
Click to expand...

CreamyGoodness said:
bruh
Click to expand...

DeaconSig said:
Are we seriously going to let the simos thing go with no further discussion?
Click to expand...

I think we did it some justice. Though I'd love to hear him double down if he wants.
 
deacondamo said:
Maybe you meant something else by this sequence of posts. The logical conclusion is that you believe student-athletes benefit from these donations and not do not need to be paid. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Do you think the players should be paid?

Personally, I feel as if the arguments against paying the players lost all modicums of reasonableness once the coach's salaries and TV contracts went through the roof. The facilities' wars just adds insult to injury.
Click to expand...

I was responding to awaken's implication that facilities don't benefit student-athletes. Maybe that is reading too much into that post. However, your statement that "facilities wars just adds insult to injury" is along the same lines - in my opinion, those facilities directly benefit student-athletes in a very significant way.

To answer your other question, no, in general I don't think student-athletes should be paid. I'm OK with increases in cost-of-attendance support and other benefits that have come about the past few years, and I think it's very reasonable to continue to look into the issue, as many have stated, college sports have become a very lucrative business. But I think the system works quite well right now for the student-athletes, as they get access to education, world class training, TV exposure, etc. There are also options for those that do not want to go to college (football is behind in this regard, but catching up). I'm pretty sure that paying players would have major unintended consequences that would ultimately destroy college athletics, which again, is currently a really sweet deal for those that can get a scholarship.
 
Facilities benefit student-athletes for the sole purpose of benefiting the athletic program.
 
PhDeac said:
Facilities benefit student-athletes for the sole purpose of benefiting the athletic program.
Click to expand...

Yes, I don't think anybody would argue otherwise. If that weren't the case all students would have access to those resources.
 
PhDeac said:
Facilities benefit student-athletes for the sole purpose of benefiting the athletic program.
Click to expand...

Of course, but they are a major direct benefit to the student-athletes.
 
So you would forgo a raise because your employer put a fountain in the lobby and got new carpet? After all, it is for your benefit...
Do you think coaches get paid less due to the nice facilities?

Instead of paying players, we shouldn't pay anyone else either, else it would "ruin college athletics." Coaches, AD's - good-bye million dollar salaries. You get paid as much as professor. Ads on televised games? - "oh no, it would taint the athlete's amateur status!" Exorbitant ticket prices? It would be immoral to charge more than $10 to watch mere students perform. Of course I am being very tongue in cheek, but my point is the sham of amateurism only applies to the athletes and not those in charge of them. Athletes deserve the same market rates that coaches and AD's get. The facilities would be less nice, and the coaches/AD's would be paid less (assuming schools would use their salaries to fund the athletes to some degree - coach/AD salaries are inflated bc athletes have not been paid), but we'd have a more fair (less racist) system.

As to how much, and who gets what - let the market decide. Anything less than that encourages additional payment under the table.

My post was mostly addressing the previous complaints about not paying athletes "we can't afford it." Sure you can.

Oh, and athletes deserve lifetime health insurance until they are able to get on another plan (pro athlete or regular job). There are guys who get hurt, endure lifetime disabilities, get dropped by the school, and left in the cold with huge med bills. Meanwhile the coach and AD have med insurance through the school. It ain't right.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
It's not really a revelation that the guy is a complete idiot.
Click to expand...

I wasn't sure about the complete part until now. That post is one of the bigger missteps I've seen on these boards. That's even worse than an "Aleppo moment."
 
awaken said:
So you would forgo a raise because your employer put a fountain in the lobby and got new carpet? After all, it is for your benefit...
Do you think coaches get paid less due to the nice facilities?

Instead of paying players, we shouldn't pay anyone else either, else it would "ruin college athletics." Coaches, AD's - good-bye million dollar salaries. You get paid as much as professor. Ads on televised games? - "oh no, it would taint the athlete's amateur status!" Exorbitant ticket prices? It would be immoral to charge more than $10 to watch mere students perform. Of course I am being very tongue in cheek, but my point is the sham of amateurism only applies to the athletes and not those in charge of them. Athletes deserve the same market rates that coaches and AD's get. The facilities would be less nice, and the coaches/AD's would be paid less (assuming schools would use their salaries to fund the athletes to some degree - coach/AD salaries are inflated bc athletes have not been paid), but we'd have a more fair (less racist) system.

As to how much, and who gets what - let the market decide. Anything less than that encourages additional payment under the table.

My post was mostly addressing the previous complaints about not paying athletes "we can't afford it." Sure you can.

Oh, and athletes deserve lifetime health insurance until they are able to get on another plan (pro athlete or regular job). There are guys who get hurt, endure lifetime disabilities, get dropped by the school, and left in the cold with huge med bills. Meanwhile the coach and AD have med insurance through the school. It ain't right.
Click to expand...

Ehh. That wasn't very persuasive. Your basic argument, I believe, is that a lot of money is made in college athletics and student-athletes don't receive as much as others in the system. That is true, and it's what most that want to pay athletes will argue. There's nothing wrong with that argument, it's just very simplistic in my opinion.

I brought up the EA sports settlement earlier, which I think is an example of this issue on a much smaller scale. The argument was that student-athletes should be reimbursed for using their image. This was upheld in court, and guess what happened? The games just disappeared, and now no student athletes (or their friends or family) get to enjoy a really cool experience of being part of a game.

Getting a college scholarship is something kids and parents across the country strive for. It provides an incredible experience for student-athletes. I'm near certain that paying athletes would ruin the system, which I think is a system that is currently a sweet deal for everyone.
 
It's not a sweet deal for athletes who are exploited.

You also left out that EA wants to make the game, players want the game, but the NCAA doesn't want to compensate the players.
 
Just glad the NCAA is consistent with their mission statement and enforcement.
 
PhDeac said:
It's not a sweet deal for athletes who are exploited.
Click to expand...

I mean, when you say this you only mean about five basketball players and twenty football players.

Arguments for paying players only really means football and basketball. There are loads of others athletes in the AD.
 
awaken said:
So you would forgo a raise because your employer put a fountain in the lobby and got new carpet? After all, it is for your benefit...
Do you think coaches get paid less due to the nice facilities?

Instead of paying players, we shouldn't pay anyone else either, else it would "ruin college athletics." Coaches, AD's - good-bye million dollar salaries. You get paid as much as professor. Ads on televised games? - "oh no, it would taint the athlete's amateur status!" Exorbitant ticket prices? It would be immoral to charge more than $10 to watch mere students perform. Of course I am being very tongue in cheek, but my point is the sham of amateurism only applies to the athletes and not those in charge of them. Athletes deserve the same market rates that coaches and AD's get. The facilities would be less nice, and the coaches/AD's would be paid less (assuming schools would use their salaries to fund the athletes to some degree - coach/AD salaries are inflated bc athletes have not been paid), but we'd have a more fair (less racist) system.

As to how much, and who gets what - let the market decide. Anything less than that encourages additional payment under the table.

My post was mostly addressing the previous complaints about not paying athletes "we can't afford it." Sure you can.

Oh, and athletes deserve lifetime health insurance until they are able to get on another plan (pro athlete or regular job). There are guys who get hurt, endure lifetime disabilities, get dropped by the school, and left in the cold with huge med bills. Meanwhile the coach and AD have med insurance through the school. It ain't right.
Click to expand...

Lose the sham of amateurism and college sports will collapse like a house of cards. Minor league sports, other than baseball (where quality of the game isn't as important), don't work in this country.

No one is watching Wake because of John Collins. We watch Wake because it is Wake. If the team happens to be good then more people will watch but the driver of the decision is the school name, not the players.
 
You can't get more Wake than this. Choke a lead against Duke and release a hype video for a building.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top