• 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!

CA about to blow up NCAA?

Rafi said:
Yeah, that was the point of the O’Bannon case and it completely backfired.
Click to expand...

Because the NCAA was willing to give up a ton of revenue. It was a bad case because it negatively impacted hundreds of thousands of people with little to do with college sports.

Anyone with the athletes’ interests in mind would have argued for athletes getting a free copy of the game as compensation and everybody would have been happy. Getting in the game was the compensation.
 
Rafi said:
I disagree. The current system works well for everyone: players, coaches, schools, media, and fans. Many players gain entrance into schools for which they otherwise would not qualify, they have access to world-class facilities, they have top-notch trainers/healthcare/coaching/nutrition, and they have $50,000 in tuition, room, and board covered annually.

The system encourages high school athletes to maintain their grades. If the US system wasn’t working, why would so many kids and their families strive for athletic scholarships? Why would student-athletes from other countries come to the US to play college sports? Why would European countries and Japan have interest in copying the US college sports system?

The system has been tweaked some (cost of living scholarships, stipends) and probably could probably be tweaked a little more (pro leagues should allow players entry out of high school). But blowing up the whole system seems like a terrible idea for all involved.

99% of the time in college athletics it is the school, not the players, that generates the fan interest and money. In the 1% of the cases in which the college player generates the interest (think Zion), the current system works well for them too. Zion got a massive amount of hype from his year at Duke, which propelled him to the number 1 pick and tons of endorsements.

One of the most hated names in sports is Ed O’Bannon. He thought he was fighting for the players and trying to get them money, but it completely backfired and now NCAA games are no longer made and gamers and current college athletes curse his name continuously (just check social media).
Click to expand...

How is this good for the players? In addition to the demands of major college sports, which are considerable, they find themselves at a distinct disadvantage in the classroom. Seems like being accepted into a school for which you are academically poorly qualified or prepared is more of a burden than an advantage, if not an outright prescription for failure. Why do we need more failure? and why should people profit from it?
 
sailordeac said:
How is this good for the players? In addition to the demands of major college sports, which are considerable, they find themselves at a distinct disadvantage in the classroom. Seems like being accepted into a school for which you are academically poorly qualified or prepared is more of a burden than an advantage, if not an outright prescription for failure. Why do we need more failure? and why should people profit from it?
Click to expand...

It gives them a great opportunity. Just because they don’t have the test scores it doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t smart enough. Plus they get a ton of academic support and take lighter class loads, which both increase the chance of academic success.

It can be difficult to predict who will have academic success in college. Across all students, some fail or drop out because of social issues, academic issues, finances, etc. I think giving student athletes an opportunity in college, some of whom did not have many academic opportunities up to that point in life, is great.
 
sailordeac said:
How is this good for the players? In addition to the demands of major college sports, which are considerable, they find themselves at a distinct disadvantage in the classroom. Seems like being accepted into a school for which you are academically poorly qualified or prepared is more of a burden than an advantage, if not an outright prescription for failure. Why do we need more failure? and why should people profit from it?
Click to expand...

How come under Skip EVERY player who stayed graduated with their class? Notre Dame has rigorous academics while having a 90% graduation rates for their football and basketball teams. Stanford is not far behind.

It's about the coach and the university. Like RAfi says, when given the opportunity many kids from in auspicious scholastic beginnings flourish when given a chance and some health.
 
Rafi said:
It gives them a great opportunity. Just because they don’t have the test scores it doesn’t necessarily mean they aren’t smart enough. Plus they get a ton of academic support and take lighter class loads, which both increase the chance of academic success.

It can be difficult to predict who will have academic success in college. Across all students, some fail or drop out because of social issues, academic issues, finances, etc. I think giving student athletes an opportunity in college, some of whom did not have many academic opportunities up to that point in life, is great.
Click to expand...

The record of graduating athletes, and especially ones poorly prepared for or equipped to do college work is not very good at a number of institutions. Admitting kids who are going to be in well over their heads academically remains a dubious idea, especially when many people, and often not the athletes themselves, are profiting from it.

Even worse, poorly prepared, and perhaps inadequately motivated, students are then steered into easy, insubstantial classes, with light work loads, in order to remain eligible.

I understand that this current system and all its faults works for many people making a living from college athletics but I don't think that admitting inadequately prepared student athletes to schools, where they will have a very difficult time being academically successful, serves their interests particularly well. Some may succeed despite the difficulties but many do not, perhaps cannot, and these would have been better served by attending institutions of high education that are better suited to their level of preparation, abilities and academic motivation. Or, perhaps they don't belong in college at all.
 
sailordeac said:
The record of graduating athletes, and especially ones poorly prepared for or equipped to do college work is not very good at a number of institutions. Admitting kids who are going to be in well over their heads academically remains a dubious idea, especially when many people, and often not the athletes themselves, are profiting from it.

Even worse, poorly prepared, and perhaps inadequately motivated, students are then steered into easy, insubstantial classes, with light work loads, in order to remain eligible.

I understand that this current system and all its faults works for many people making a living from college athletics but I don't think that admitting inadequately prepared student athletes to schools, where they will have a very difficult time being academically successful, serves their interests particularly well. Some may succeed despite the difficulties but many do not, perhaps cannot, and these would have been better served by attending institutions of high education that are better suited to their level of preparation, abilities and academic motivation. Or, perhaps they don't belong in college at all.
Click to expand...

Statistics just do not support this narrative at all. 86% of college athletes graduate, compared to 64% of the general college population.
 
Rafi, that's a very deceptive number. How many of those athletes are non-scholarship(or partial)? How many are in non-revenue sports?
 
RJKarl said:
Rafi, that's a very deceptive number. How many of those athletes are non-scholarship(or partial)? How many are in non-revenue sports?
Click to expand...

I’d have to search for those numbers. I think the takeaway from what I posted is that a lot of students don’t graduate from college, but many don’t think about those students, they just think about the student-athletes that don’t make it.
 
booradley said:
It's time to end the hypocrisy, one way or another.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The fundamental issue is hypocrisy. Those who dont agree with that will never see a solution. The current and ever worsening system is a masquerade for education. The only solution is to regress to previous systems (how about freshmen ineligibility) or provide legitimate non-academic alternatives that would be similar to an apprenticeship or pure trade school. The latter having no negative implications, but doomed to failure because few would rally behind a trade school. An interim solution is inevitably coming based on the current underlying financial gain of all parties except the athlete. It is financially motivation by all parties and by definition, will result in paying so-called students. Eventually this will lead to separation of institutions who have had enough of it... except it will be very difficult because they are in so deep with the current system.
 
Not having college football Saturdays would suck, but besides that I'm cool with college sports dying. It really is a massive scam. As is a lot of higher education. Wouldn't mind seeing the entire model drastically changed.
 
Everybody else associated with college athletics gets paid the market rate. Everybody except the athletes. Athletes deserve a portion of the revenues that they generate according to free market rates.

If it is so wrong to pay players, then it is wrong to put the games on commercial TV. Wrong to have exorbitant ticket prices. Wrong for coaches to get paid more than professors. Wrong to sell jerseys of the star player's number. Wrong to not provide lifetime healthcare to athletes who risk brain injury playing gladiator sports. Wrong to dictate what majors an athlete can pursue.

I'm fine with big time college athletics. Just make it big time for everybody. What we have now is an exploitative indentured servant program. I know many enjoy the current system (and fuck the college athlete, right?), but we need to do what is right and fair despite the pain or disruption involved.

I'm ready for OldGoldBeard's neg rep every time I post on this topic. Bring it!
 
awaken said:
What we have now is an exploitative indentured servant program. I know many enjoy the current system (and fuck the college athlete, right?)
Click to expand...

Anyone describing it this way is massively exaggerating the current situation. Wake has been tweeting this week about their new student-athlete nutrition center, which looks incredible. The Shah center is going to be a great resource for the student-athletes. Clemson’s football complex?

When a high school athlete excitedly tweets about an offer, and hundreds congratulate him/her, no one ever says “congrats on your indentured servant program!”

In my opinion, the only change needed is to let athletes enter pro leagues whenever they are ready. Students can then completely choose the route they wish to take.
 
Rafi’s out here talking about how nice the plantation is.

It is the only system there is. That doesn’t make it the right one.
 
There are plenty of college players who never make the cover of a magazine. They might play special teams or just are blocking dummies two days a week. They get their degrees and walk away with stories to tell in job interviews, a Bowl ring to show off, and no scars on their knees. Not every player is worth millions of dollars to a program. ADs will spend less on promotions to save more on payouts to athletes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top