Draymond on Tyler

[alabamaheel]

having paid for two college educations (three counting my own) i can assure you that a scholarship covering tuition, fees, books, tutoring, room, meals, medical care, etc. is VERY substantial compensation. millions of families work for years to pay off this great burden. yes, the athletes work for their extremely valuable scholarships, but the work they do is playing a game they love which they would undoubtedly play for long hours on their own as so many young people do. another fact that is routinely ignored is that ALL scholarship players, including the injured or poorly performing, get these valuable resources, not just the stars who win games. when a kid gets a scholarship offer the family CELEBRATES because they are getting a great deal and their kid is getting a wonderful opportunity to make connections and learn life skills for success. they're not celebrating their kid's entry into slavery.

Just stop. You’re making too much sense.

 

[bluetoe]

just so's I can keep up, are some of us suggesting that those whose countenances are more marketable should make money on said countenances, while their less marketable teammates make jack shit?

 

[JimmyinVA]

just so's I can keep up, are some of us suggesting that those whose countenances are more marketable should make money on said countenances, while their less marketable teammates make jack shit?

yeah, there's so little team spirit left in college sports, why not kill it off entirely...

 

[uncfootball-]

I wonder how the Offensive Line would feel about Sam getting paid large cash while they get zero. Would be interesting to see Sam sling it around the yard with no OL.

 

[bluetoe]

I'll stick with my earlier suggestion. IF it is decided that players should share some of the income, then a portion of their earnings could go to pay for their education.

Seems fair to me, but I'm open to other suggestions.

respectfully, I'm going to file this idea alongside the concept of collecting taxes from ourselves in order to pay ourselves a salary.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

respectfully, I'm going to file this idea alongside the concept of collecting taxes from ourselves in order to pay ourselves a salary.

I don't see any similarity. Perhaps you could explain.

 

[bluetoe]

I don't see any similarity. Perhaps you could explain.

well, hopefully you can see the fundamental insanity of taking your money in order to give you money. If you see that, then it isn't much of a leap to see that diverting money from a school's income to give to a player and then diverting it back from the player to the school in order to pay for the education that it's providing follows the same sort of logic.

Just let me keep my money, and let the school keep the money it needs to provide education. Fundamentally more logical and less chance of money getting lost in the unnecessary shuffle.

 

[DSouthr]

I just think this entire thread is silly because this is one of those things blown totally out of proportion, as is the case with so much now days. This isn't complicated, everyone seems to feel this need to make it complicated where it just isn't. If a kid or his parents/handlers do not like the proposition of playing college sports then DO NOT PLAY COLLEGE SPORTS! You want to be paid for playing then by al means do so, there are many other avenues available for ya.

Green knew full well the rules he had to obey when he decided to play college ball and guess what, when he decided to play college ball the rules didn't seem to be a problem for him, did they? Funny how they only became a problem for him once he became a multi-millionaire?

I am so tired of the race baiting that is going on, taking anything that is beloved and turning it to evil by attaching an accusation of rascism, slavery, priveledge for only a few. Every aspect of life simply is not a function of race yet there seems to be this endless search to make it all about race.

 

[Bubspub88]

well, hopefully you can see the fundamental insanity of taking your money in order to give you money. If you see that, then it isn't much of a leap to see that diverting money from a school's income to give to a player and then diverting it back from the player to the school in order to pay for the education that it's providing follows the same sort of logic.

Just let me keep my money, and let the school keep the money it needs to provide education. Fundamentally more logical and less chance of money getting lost in the unnecessary shuffle.

Blue
I am trying to focus on what you are saying but my eyes keep drifting left to your avatar

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

well, hopefully you can see the fundamental insanity of taking your money in order to give you money. If you see that, then it isn't much of a leap to see that diverting money from a school's income to give to a player and then diverting it back from the player to the school in order to pay for the education that it's providing follows the same sort of logic.

Just let me keep my money, and let the school keep the money it needs to provide education. Fundamentally more logical and less chance of money getting lost in the unnecessary shuffle.

The debate is whether the player is entitled to some of the money that now gets claimed by the school. IF it's decided that he is entitled to that money, then I don't see the problem.

The usual argument against paying student athletes is that we are already paying them in tuition and board and such.

The usual argument for paying them money is that they actually earn it.

So if you buy that argument, it makes sense to put both types of payment on the table.

Right now, the school is "taking your money" and not giving it to you. Arguably even more insane than taking it and then giving it to you.

 

[bluetoe]

The debate is whether the player is entitled to some of the money that now gets claimed by the school. IF it's decided that he is entitled to that money, then I don't see the problem.

The usual argument against paying student athletes is that we are already paying them in tuition and board and such.

The usual argument for paying them money is that they actually earn it.

So if you buy that argument, it makes sense to put both types of payment on the table.

Right now, the school is "taking your money" and not giving it to you. Arguably even more insane than taking it and then giving it to you.

"The debate is whether the player is entitled to some of the money that now gets claimed by the school. IF it's decided that he is entitled to that money, then I don't see the problem."

My point isn't about whether the athlete deserves a cut of the action. My point is about what you said should happen if he does get a cut.

The problem I have is that you said he should then share that money with the school so as to help pay for the education that they are providing. The exceedingly simple point I am trying to make is, why take his cut from the school only to give the money back to the school to help pay for his education? Just let the school keep that amount of money to begin with.

C'mon man. My dog would understand this.

 

[What Would Jesus Do?]

"The debate is whether the player is entitled to some of the money that now gets claimed by the school. IF it's decided that he is entitled to that money, then I don't see the problem."

My point isn't about whether the athlete deserves a cut of the action. My point is about what you said should happen if he does get a cut.

The problem I have is that you said he should then share that money with the school so as to help pay for the education that they are providing. The exceedingly simple point I am trying to make is, why take his cut from the school only to give the money back to the school to help pay for his education? Just let the school keep that amount of money to begin with.

C'mon man. My dog would understand this.

My suggestion was in response to some who said if the kids earn any money they shouldn't get free tuition and whatnot.

My suggestion was intended as an alternative to totally yanking the scholarship. Partial payment perhaps as a percentage of earnings.

 

[bluetoe]

My suggestion was in response to some who said if the kids earn any money they shouldn't get free tuition and whatnot.

My suggestion was intended as an alternative to totally yanking the scholarship. Partial payment perhaps as a percentage of earnings.

LOL, I understand and neither agree or disagree with anything above because none of it is my point. I don't know how to make it any simpler or clearer, that IF the player is to be given a cut of the proceeds, just subtract out the amount needed to provide his tuition and room and board, etc, instead of giving it to him and then having him give that money right back to the school. Just let the school retain whatever part of his cut is necessary instead of needlessly making it change hands. Make his scholarship/education an expense..a cost of doing business...and not a product to be sold.

Say the school takes in an amount of revenue that amounts to 50,000/yr. for player X, after expenses. The cost of providing his scholarship is 30,000. Don't give the player 50,000 and then charge him back the 30,000. Instead the school just keeps the 30,000 and gives the player 20,000.

I believe you must have overthought this, when I was really just poking a little fun. But maybe at least now you can see how this compares to collecting taxes from us in order to give us back a stipend.