South Park blasts NCAA

[corncraze]

Thought this was funny that South Park went after this. Wonder if the current Big talks to increases players stipends had any influence on why South Park choose to do this.

 

I do think this adds even more to the debate though. Should college athletes be paid?

 

If you missed it, you can watch it free here.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e05-crack-baby-athletic-association

[NUpolo8]

There needs to be a f#*k NO option.

[holvy83]

everyone is poor in college, it is the privilege of being a scholarship athlete that you don't have to spend the rest of your life paying for your education like most do. I'd say getting a degree and being debt free would be worth it's weight in gold.

[Hercules]

Great episode. "How do you get away with not paying your... 'student-athletes?'"

[corncraze]

Great episode. "How do you get away with not paying your... 'student-athletes?'"

Slash isn't real haha

[Ringer02]

That was hilarious, I'm surprised Sam Keller wasn't in it...or I guess he probably would have sued them.

[Malth]

That was hilarious, I'm surprised Sam Keller wasn't in it...or I guess he probably would have sued them.

 

 

derp

[RedDenver]

Other students can receive more in scholarship money than athletes, plus those students have no restrictions on where and when they can work outside of school. I say bump the stipend to cover what other scholarships are allowed to cover or remove the employment restrictions.

 

As an aside, I wonder how many opinions would change if a no minimum age pro football league formed. A minor-league for the NFL, if you will. Imagine if those high school football stars could go straight for the money like baseball or basketball and never set foot on a campus. I think it would change the face of college athletics where CFB could lose hundreds of millions of dollars. This stipend we're arguing about is small potatoes in dollar amounts to that scenario.

[mnhusker]

I picked "sort of" these guys need to have a way to make ends meet when they have no other source of income. They give all they can so they can not work during most of the year, I'd like to see 'em get some wam (Walking around Money) so they can goof off a bit. I had some grant and scholarship money but I still worked part time so I could goof off a bit or go to a concert.

[Minnesota_husker]

Excellent episode.... I was dying of laughter.

[corncraze]

Other students can receive more in scholarship money than athletes, plus those students have no restrictions on where and when they can work outside of school. I say bump the stipend to cover what other scholarships are allowed to cover or remove the employment restrictions.

 

As an aside, I wonder how many opinions would change if a no minimum age pro football league formed. A minor-league for the NFL, if you will. Imagine if those high school football stars could go straight for the money like baseball or basketball and never set foot on a campus. I think it would change the face of college athletics where CFB could lose hundreds of millions of dollars. This stipend we're arguing about is small potatoes in dollar amounts to that scenario.

The NCAA basically is the minor leagues of the NFL now

[Fuzzy]

I was hooked at...

 

Hi, I'm Sarah McLachlan, I was famous for 2 months.

 

Classic!

 

I can't offer you or your child any cash, i can however offer you a little bit of crack. LMAO

[papersun87]

Slash not being real was the best part of the episode.

[Enhance]

The simple answer is no, and there are several reasons why they shouldn't.

 

1) They are attending college and receiving an entirely free college education.

2) They receive all-expenses-paid trips across the country.

3) Schools' training tables, or the large dining halls reserved for student-athletes, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to maintain yearly including food costs. Again, at no cost to the student, they receive the best food and diet advice money can buy.

 

The list goes on for all of the things these guys get, but there's one overwhelming issue to also considers.

 

Gregg Doyel of cbssports.com tells why here

 

This quote sums up his point.

 

That's where the payment of college athletes becomes untenable. Not all players are equal. At Michigan, quarterback Denard Robinson could be worth more to the athletic department's bottom line than any three or five or maybe 10 players on roster. And you could probably identify the last 25 players on scholarship and determine that Robinson is worth more than all of them combined. So if you advocate paying college football players, how do you clear that hurdle? By giving a fourth-string defensive tackle as much money as Heisman candidate Denard Robinson?

 

Or you could go the more democratic route and base a player's pay on his performance. But then, key players do get injured. Or even benched. Which means they'd require a cut in pay.

 

See my point? Paying college players is a fool's errand, but let's go one step farther and talk to the fools who think these guys need the money in the first place. If you're one of those fools, my apologies -- but stop being foolish. Do a Google search for the terms "A.J. Green" and "slavery" and see just how stupid some people can get

 

Also...

 

The same goes for an athlete's book allowances. Buy used books, pocket the difference. Athletes know the system and they work it -- and don't get me started on Pell Grants, which can be thousands of dollars in free money, no strings attached, for qualifying players in addition to their scholarship.

 

Alabama's Marcell Dareus was suspended for the season's first two games for receiving benefits from an agent. To be reinstated, he had to pay $1,787.17 -- the amount of benefits on two agent-funded trips -- to the charity of his choice. The NCAA allowed for a payment plan, but Dareus didn't need it.

 

He paid in cash.

 

How you think he did that?

[RedDenver]

The simple answer is no, and there are several reasons why they shouldn't.

 

1) They are attending college and receiving an entirely free college education.

2) They receive all-expenses-paid trips across the country.

3) Schools' training tables, or the large dining halls reserved for student-athletes, cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to maintain yearly including food costs. Again, at no cost to the student, they receive the best food and diet advice money can buy.

 

The list goes on for all of the things these guys get, but there's one overwhelming issue to also considers.

 

Gregg Doyel of cbssports.com tells why here

 

This quote sums up his point.

 

That's where the payment of college athletes becomes untenable. Not all players are equal. At Michigan, quarterback Denard Robinson could be worth more to the athletic department's bottom line than any three or five or maybe 10 players on roster. And you could probably identify the last 25 players on scholarship and determine that Robinson is worth more than all of them combined. So if you advocate paying college football players, how do you clear that hurdle? By giving a fourth-string defensive tackle as much money as Heisman candidate Denard Robinson?

 

Or you could go the more democratic route and base a player's pay on his performance. But then, key players do get injured. Or even benched. Which means they'd require a cut in pay.

 

See my point? Paying college players is a fool's errand, but let's go one step farther and talk to the fools who think these guys need the money in the first place. If you're one of those fools, my apologies -- but stop being foolish. Do a Google search for the terms "A.J. Green" and "slavery" and see just how stupid some people can get

 

Also...

 

The same goes for an athlete's book allowances. Buy used books, pocket the difference. Athletes know the system and they work it -- and don't get me started on Pell Grants, which can be thousands of dollars in free money, no strings attached, for qualifying players in addition to their scholarship.

 

Alabama's Marcell Dareus was suspended for the season's first two games for receiving benefits from an agent. To be reinstated, he had to pay $1,787.17 -- the amount of benefits on two agent-funded trips -- to the charity of his choice. The NCAA allowed for a payment plan, but Dareus didn't need it.

 

He paid in cash.

 

How you think he did that?

I think the writer you're quoting is using a strawman argument. The proposal being considered by the B1G is about increasing the athletic scholarship amount for ALL scholarship players, not how much to pay players based on performance. This is not a performance-based consideration. He asks the question "So if you advocate paying college football players, how do you clear that hurdle? By giving a fourth-string defensive tackle as much money as Heisman candidate Denard Robinson?", which clearly has the answer "yes" as a solution. In fact, the proposal actually takes the stance that not only will the 4th string DT make as much as the Heisman candidate, but so will the backup schollie player on the women's soccer team.

 

Here's a couple takes I tend to agree with: link and link