Jump to content


Do you support allowing college athletes to be paid for ''their likeness''?

K9Buck

By K9Buck,
in Politics & Religion

Recommended Posts

Hans Gruber Four-Star Recruit

Hans Gruber

Posted
Posted

Mods, feel free to delete this if it's out of bounds.

 

I don't like politics and don't care for either side. However ...

 

With all this talk of communism, it's ironic that collegiate sports are probably the most communist thing in the United States. Athletes are unpaid, but get free food along with room and board for their labor while the schools keep all the money and make all the rules. 

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment

JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Nebfanatic said:

The market determines this. There is more money to go around to NFL quarterbacks because the product they are a part of produces more money than those other professions. Funny thing, college athletics is the same way.

 

I understand how and why it works the way it does. I was specifically addressing the argument that it's not fair to collegiate athletes to not get more of the revenue share.

Link to comment
JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Hans Gruber said:

Mods, feel free to delete this if it's out of bounds.

 

I don't like politics and don't care for either side. However ...

 

With all this talk of communism, it's ironic that collegiate sports are probably the most communist thing in the United States. Athletes are unpaid, but get free food along with room and board for their labor while the schools keep all the money and make all the rules. 

I bet a lot of people would like to be "unpaid" to the tune of a $50K per year education, room & board, nutrition and health consultants, better food than the general student population and a stipend on top of it all.

 

I'll reiterate, it's a measly 4 years where yes, they are helping schools and AD's and coaches and  others make ridiculous sums off of the game they play on Saturdays. So what? They're getting a free education that many people cannot afford and in some cases they are showcasing their talent for professional careers. I guess the alternative is to pay them in a free market capitalistic manner, completely destroy the college game and then years down the road we can all bemoan the fact that we screwed the pooch.

Link to comment
Hans Gruber Four-Star Recruit

Hans Gruber

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

I bet a lot of people would like to be "unpaid" to the tune of a $50K per year education, room & board, nutrition and health consultants, better food than the general student population and a stipend on top of it all.

 

I'll reiterate, it's a measly 4 years where yes, they are helping schools and AD's and coaches and  others make ridiculous sums off of the game they play on Saturdays. So what? They're getting a free education that many people cannot afford and in some cases they are showcasing their talent for professional careers. I guess the alternative is to pay them in a free market capitalistic manner, completely destroy the college game and then years down the road we can all bemoan the fact that we screwed the pooch.

Why do people think players getting paid would destroy things? I'll admit, it's possible I guess. 

 

But people thought adding black players would destroy things. Unlimited substitutions would destroy things. True freshman playing will destroy things. Coaches getting paid more than university presidents will destroy things. The Rose Bowl not having a Big 10 team against a Pac 10 team will destroy things. A four-team playoff will destroy things.

 

College football is as popular as ever. Players being able to profit off their would certainly change things. I doubt it would ruin anything. 

  • Plus1 4
  • Fire 1
Link to comment

Nebfanatic Heisman Winner

Nebfanatic

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, JJ Husker said:

 

I understand how and why it works the way it does. I was specifically addressing the argument that it's not fair to collegiate athletes to not get more of the revenue share.

Except when I use the term fair in that sense I mean they aren't allowed to use the market in the way everyone else in this country gets to. So I guess saying its unjust is more accurate.

Link to comment
knapplc Legend

knapplc

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Hans Gruber said:

But people thought adding black players would destroy things. Unlimited substitutions would destroy things. True freshman playing will destroy things. Coaches getting paid more than university presidents will destroy things. The Rose Bowl not having a Big 10 team against a Pac 10 team will destroy things. A four-team playoff will destroy things.

 

The forward pass was supposed to destroy the game.

  • Plus1 2
  • Fire 1
Link to comment
JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Hans Gruber said:

Why do people think players getting paid would destroy things? I'll admit, it's possible I guess. 

 

But people thought adding black players would destroy things. Unlimited substitutions would destroy things. True freshman playing will destroy things. Coaches getting paid more than university presidents will destroy things. The Rose Bowl not having a Big 10 team against a Pac 10 team will destroy things. A four-team playoff will destroy things.

 

College football is as popular as ever. Players being able to profit off their would certainly change things. I doubt it would ruin anything. 

I've pretry much explained why I think it will ruin the game earlier in this thread. That is my opinion being influenced by my feelings about the differences between college ball and pro ball. Of course it may not have as big of a detrimental effect as I think. But I also think the fundamental changes are undeniable. Money will have even more control in determining where players go and the chasm between haves and have nots will widen greatly. I guess it remains to be seen if it will alter the game to the point it is a de facto professional feeder league or just a psuedo pro sport. I just happen to be one that appreciates the little bit of amateur nature of the game that remains. I assume there are many others that agree with me and that may very well bail on the sport if it changes as much as I think it will.  It probably doesn't matter much anyway, the way things are going with concussions and rule changes, I doubt the game I love will be noticeable soon anyway.

Link to comment
JJ Husker Head Coach

JJ Husker

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, Nebfanatic said:

Except when I use the term fair in that sense I mean they aren't allowed to use the market in the way everyone else in this country gets to. So I guess saying its unjust is more accurate.

You'll get no argument from me on this point. Although I would add that they also get opportunities and perks that not many others in this country are afforded. Good with the bad and all that jazz...

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Moiraine Head Coach

Moiraine

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Saunders said:

Oh, and let's keep the P&R talk outta here. Rules are rules.

 

The OP would need to be deleted or edited to keep P&R talk out. The topic started out political. It should be moved to P&R or that part of it deleted, IMO. 

 

If people don’t have the right to respond to the political part of the OP, the political part of the OP should be removed.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Saunders Defensive Coordinator

Saunders

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

The OP would need to be deleted or edited to keep P&R talk out. The topic started out political. It should be moved to P&R or that part of it deleted, IMO. 

 

If people don’t have the right to respond to the political part of the OP, the political part of the OP should be removed.

Fair point @Moiraine. I'll admit, I skimmed the topic on my phone before moving it. I'm moving it to P&R.

 

:thumbs

Link to comment
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Visit the Sports Illustrated Husker site



×
×
  • Create New...