I would assume they idiotically believe it takes away from the TV/radio experience from their corporate partners at ESPN? Even though ESPN tweets every fucking thing they air, with highlights.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
I would assume they idiotically believe it takes away from the TV/radio experience from their corporate partners at ESPN? Even though ESPN tweets every fucking thing they air, with highlights.
Here's the NCAA rule in all its asinine glory:
The blog may not produce in any form a “real-time” description of the event. Real-time is defined by the NCAA as a continuous play-by-play account or live, extended live/real-time statistics, or detailed description of an event. Live-video/digital images or live audio are not permitted.... If the NCAA deems that a Credential Holder is producing a real-time description of the contest, the NCAA reserves all actions against Credential Holder, including but not limited to the revocation of the credential.
That's amazing, given that 90% of the time the only way I could follow non-revenue (and also hockey like 50% of the time) Michigan sports is people live tweeting them.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
The media coordinator at one of our sites incorrectly told a writer that there is a limitation to how many tweets someone can send per inning. This person has not served as a host in a number of years and shared outdated social media policies. We just found out that this individual was given this bad information two years ago, when they were in the tournament at another site (but not serving as the host). The information was incorrect in 2016 and is obviously still wrong today. This policy was changed before 2013, when I started in my current position, and likely changed in 2011, when Turner took over operation of our digital platforms. I wish I had an answer as to why this issue pops up every couple years, but I don’t. All I can say is that the communication doesn’t originate from our office.
The media coordinator at one of our sites incorrectly told a writer that there is a limitation to how many tweets someone can send per inning. This person has not served as a host in a number of years and shared outdated social media policies. We just found out that this individual was given this bad information two years ago, when they were in the tournament at another site (but not serving as the host). The information was incorrect in 2016 and is obviously still wrong today. This policy was changed before 2013, when I started in my current position, and likely changed in 2011, when Turner took over operation of our digital platforms. I wish I had an answer as to why this issue pops up every couple years, but I don’t. All I can say is that the communication doesn’t originate from our office.
I have an answer as to why it keeps popping up - your office does jack shit to correct the problem!
The NCAA sucks a little less today. Two rule changes:
1)
The Division I Council adopted a proposal this week that creates a new “notification-of-transfer” model. This new system allows a student to inform his or her current school of a desire to transfer, then requires that school to enter the student’s name into a national transfer database within two business days. Once the student-athlete’s name is in the database, other coaches are free to contact that individual.
And that's the only thing schools can do about transfers under NCAA rules. Conferences can be more restrictive. I know the Big Ten is not.
2) Football players may play in up to four games and not have that year count against their eligibility. Not a huge moral thing, but a nice change that creates less uncertainty with medical redshirt applications and stuff.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
But Louisville accepting their new designation as the first school to ever vacate a national championship does not mean the players from the title-winning team have to accept the decision. Per an Associated Press report, five players from the 2013 title team, including captain Luke Hancock, have filed a lawsuit against the NCAA over its punishment of the program. The plaintiffs reportedly include Hancock, Tim Henderson, Stephan Van Treese, Mike Marra, and Minnesota Timberwolves big man Gorgui Dieng.
The bringing of the lawsuit occasioned a press conference, and the press conference provided an opportunity for John Morgan, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, to tee off on the NCAA:
“In the sports world, I don’t think there is any Goliath that exists like the NCAA. The NCAA is a giant, but the NCAA is a morally bankrupt organization that has taken advantage of economically disadvantaged young people throughout our country.
“They answer to nobody but are bad for everybody.”
The lawsuit reportedly “seeks declaration that [the NCAA] wrongfully vacated the plaintiffs’ wins, honors and awards,” without specifying any monetary damages. Hancock, in particular, wants his damn name cleared:
“It’s been five years and I can’t tell you two days where I’ve gone without having someone come to me and ask me if I had strippers or prostitutes in the dorm,” he said.
Their argument is simple - the sort of recruiting problems that led to the vacation of the championship are ultimately due to the NCAA's rules regarding "amateurism" distorting the issue, and that the NCAA should fix things by reforming, not punishing players.
The plan can be viewed as a bit of a half-measure, with the due acknowledgement that it is indeed a step of progress when compared to the present system. In their imagined world of college athletics, athletes would continue to give up their ability to make money for their skills while in college, with their compensation only paid out upon graduation. Until then, they would not be allowed to contact any of the companies that fuel their payments, like those in the shoe, apparel, or video game industries. Instead, an independent non-profit clearinghouse would operate as representation for the athletes, negotiating individual and group deals.
Yes, this would be an improvement, but only because the current NCAA model is utterly reprehensible. In this system, players would effectively be covered by a single institutional agent, which would be set up to not work in the players' interest by its very structure:
The key innovation here is the formation of the clearinghouse. The institution would basically be doing what an agent could do for the athletes, only everyone has the same agent in this scenario. It would be operated by a board and a CEO, with four committees, made up of appointees from the board, the NCAA, and a variety of college athletics groups.
And that's not even getting to the wage theft:
Like any NCAA-run operation, there are plenty of rules in place, too. Athletes would have their money snatched away if the NCAA makes them permanently ineligible, or if they commit a number of violent crimes or get popped with an illegal gun or get hit with charges like racketeering.
The most important stipulation, however, is that an athlete will not be paid if they fail to graduate. This is, of course, an attempt at tying the college academic experience to the college athletic experience in hopes of appeasing the NCAA with just enough of a financial power imbalance to get their co-sign. In this form, the rule veils itself as an incentive, when in fact it would hurt the one group that produces the vast majority of revenue NCAA coaches and athletic directors have been building lake houses with for decades—black male athletes. A 2018 USC study revealed that among Power Five schools, 55 percent of black male athletes graduated within six years; compare that to 69 percent of all college athletes and 76.3 percent of all undergraduate students.
If an athlete is forced to forfeit their money, the cash will be placed in a “General Scholarship Fund,” which will then spend it on scholarships for non-athletes and “additional community programs,” as determined by the clearinghouse.
This is a complete nonstarter. Those players have earned that money - to say that they don't get it if they leave the school for any reason other than matriculation is theft, plain and simple.
This proposal shows, once again, that the only solution to the NCAA is breaking it.
While the NCAA studies the issue, Marshall and West Virginia are among the Division I universities interested in receiving a percentage of the amount wagered on college sports. Officials from each university participated in meetings this spring with representatives from the state lottery, governor's office, the American Gaming Association and Major League Baseball and the NBA and came away with hopes of receiving a 0.25 percent fee based on the amount wagered on college sports in West Virginia.
"The fee would help us with additional resources for us to do what we need to do to deal with this whole process," Marshall athletic director Mike Hamrick told ESPN on Wednesday. Hamrick was formerly athletic director at the University of Nevada-Las Vegas.
Universities such as Connecticut, Missouri and Rutgers are among the others that have met with professional leagues to discuss getting a fee from sports betting, sometimes referred to as an "integrity fee."
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
Yes, that's the problem. You are expecting hospitals to run sport leagues where the teams are composed of patients.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
Yes, that's the problem. You are expecting hospitals to run sport leagues where the teams are composed of patients.
That is a really bad analogy, so let's drop it. The problem is that the NCAA continues to impose unreasonable rules on both players and schools because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. And the answer is to break the NCAA and get rid of these rules, instead forcing the schools to deal with players fairly.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
Yes, that's the problem. You are expecting hospitals to run sport leagues where the teams are composed of patients.
That is a really bad analogy, so let's drop it. The problem is that the NCAA continues to impose unreasonable rules on both players and schools because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. And the answer is to break the NCAA and get rid of these rules, instead forcing the schools to deal with players fairly.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
Yes, that's the problem. You are expecting hospitals to run sport leagues where the teams are composed of patients.
That is a really bad analogy, so let's drop it. The problem is that the NCAA continues to impose unreasonable rules on both players and schools because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. And the answer is to break the NCAA and get rid of these rules, instead forcing the schools to deal with players fairly.
The fact that you think that analogy is bad is a perfect illustration of the problem: it's an absurd model; you are just used to it.
Everything else come from the fact that you are trying to use a model based on students, rather than employees, in an organisation structured to administer research and education, to act as a sports league.
You are literally taking a structure where sports are supposed to be nothing more than a hobby, something to do between classes, and then taking it seriously and throwing money at it.
On top of that, you have people who cares more about sports than education clamouring for more and more. You call those "fans" and "alumni".
It's always going to be corrupt, because the whole structure is absurd and fundamentally dysfunctional.
I mean this covers both this thread and the “fuck the motherfucking ncaa” thread, but there’s so much damn money involved because they don’t pay the athletes that this kind of gross shit is inevitable
And that's the heart of the matter - because of the NCAA's Byzantine (and in some ways illegal) regulations on recruiting and paying players, we wind up with a system that is fucked all the way down.
Nah, the issue is that y'all care so goddamn much about college sports that it just pours massive amounts of money and power into the industry, leading to endemic corruption because it's still not an actual sporting league business and so things like the lines of accountability and the responsibility and who is being exposed to this are blurred.
Well yes, because that's how the NCAA runs things. They want to be a sports league when it benefits them, and an academic organization when it benefits them, which has led to the entirely fucked up situation we have today. The problem really isn't the money itself - it's that it has to be kept all under the table.
It's supposed to be a fucking university: a place to learn, not a place to play ball. Just do the reasonable things and stop watching games, stop having universities waste money on coaches and stadium, and stop having universities compromise their functions of teaching and research, and all the problems disappear.
It's supposed to be a hobby for a few students. Like the anime club.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
The problem is that you are trying to give universities a job that is not related to their function. That's the core issue. It's like expecting hospitals to run a sport league. It's just stupid.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
Yes, that's the problem. You are expecting hospitals to run sport leagues where the teams are composed of patients.
That is a really bad analogy, so let's drop it. The problem is that the NCAA continues to impose unreasonable rules on both players and schools because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. And the answer is to break the NCAA and get rid of these rules, instead forcing the schools to deal with players fairly.
The problem is that the NCAA exists in the first place because it creates incredible incentives to do exactly what they are doing, provides tons of cover for it and puts labourers/students in really awkward situations where they lack real agency or options.
Let's go with the hospital analogy. It's like your hospital has a sports team attached to it made of of residents. Some of whom aren't even trying to be doctors.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
The argument that college sports shouldn't exist is a ridiculous non-starter even if it's basically right. They exist, they're a billion dollar industry, and nothing is going to change that.
So you need to figure out how to actually make the system equitable. And that goes to actually paying the people generating the money.
Also: big time college sports is one of the few socially acceptable ways to get poor (black) kids an elite education. Because America is awesome.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
I'm just trying to put a marker on the ground here to see why we even NEED any kind of organized college sport beyond just letting the sport team chat with freshers at the club meeting during freshers week is.
Do you really think that all that money actually helps the schools educate people (or conduct research if you view that as the primary purpose, I'd argue that conducting research is actually in service of educating people, since by having amazing researchers you have access to cutting edge knowledge and techniques who those people and their students can teach to others) or does that money just help the schools run a very successful football and basketball program?
You seem to despise the NCAA. I agree they are a terrible organization. One way to destroy them completely would be to ban the entire concept (or just never introduce it in the first place) of a semi pro sports team being run by a university. Which is what every other nation on earth has done. Every other sport and country just has proper developmental leagues with no ties to universities. Why don't we just do that?
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
I'm just trying to put a marker on the ground here to see why we even NEED any kind of organized college sport beyond just letting the sport team chat with freshers at the club meeting during freshers week is.
Do you really think that all that money actually helps the schools educate people (or conduct research if you view that as the primary purpose, I'd argue that conducting research is actually in service of educating people, since by having amazing researchers you have access to cutting edge knowledge and techniques who those people and their students can teach to others) or does that money just help the schools run a very successful football and basketball program?
You seem to despise the NCAA. I agree they are a terrible organization. One way to destroy them completely would be to ban the entire concept (or just never introduce it in the first place) of a semi pro sports team being run by a university. Which is what every other nation on earth has done. Every other sport and country just has proper developmental leagues with no ties to universities. Why don't we just do that?
Because we have 200+ years of history with that system, and it's really hard to just blow that up? It would be far easier at this point to reform the existing system.
The argument that college sports shouldn't exist is a ridiculous non-starter even if it's basically right. They exist, they're a billion dollar industry, and nothing is going to change that.
So you need to figure out how to actually make the system equitable. And that goes to actually paying the people generating the money.
Also: big time college sports is one of the few socially acceptable ways to get poor (black) kids an elite education. Because America is awesome.
If the teams are SO important, then fine. Let them stay. Let them keep the names. They now manage themselves, hire their own staff, and just give 10% gross revenue to the schools for the privilege of using the school names. No more scholarships. If the NCAA is so awful, then the salaries the kids end up with at the teams should be more than enough for them to pay for themselves to go to college later in life.
The argument that college sports shouldn't exist is a ridiculous non-starter even if it's basically right. They exist, they're a billion dollar industry, and nothing is going to change that.
So you need to figure out how to actually make the system equitable. And that goes to actually paying the people generating the money.
Also: big time college sports is one of the few socially acceptable ways to get poor (black) kids an elite education. Because America is awesome.
If the teams are SO important, then fine. Let them stay. Let them keep the names. They now manage themselves, hire their own staff, and just give 10% gross revenue to the schools for the privilege of using the school names. No more scholarships. If the NCAA is so awful, then the salaries the kids end up with at the teams should be more than enough for them to pay for themselves to go to college later in life.
You have somehow come up with a worse system. Which is actually remarkable.
The solution is actually super easy to think about, just harder to implement, which is that you reduce coaching payscales in the big time sports, knock out a ton of useless bloat in the administration of athletic departments (also a larger university problem!) and then pay players the revenue they're generating while continuing to provide them a free education.
Meanwhile because of how America works, having successful athletic teams does improve your ability to do research, which lets you attract the best faculty, which lets you better educate your students. College athletics builds a sense of community within the alumni and makes them more likely to donate. It also attracts more applications, small schools that make the Final Four in men's basketball consistently see more applications in the following years. So it also creates more alumni. Who then give back to the school, they have more money to build state of the art buildings or fund interesting research to attract the best faculty.
Kind of ironically since it highlights some of the worst parts of the NCAA system, Penn State is the absolute best example of this. They got into the Big Ten by being really good at football. By getting into the Big Ten they got into the Big Ten Academic Alliance (at the time the CIC) which is a research consortium that lobbies for federal research dollars. And does really well at it. In the last 25 years, PSU has gone from a pretty good state school to an elite research institution, largely on the back of that alliance.
Is this the system you'd design if you were building from the ground up? No, it is not. But it's what we have and we have to work within it.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
I'm just trying to put a marker on the ground here to see why we even NEED any kind of organized college sport beyond just letting the sport team chat with freshers at the club meeting during freshers week is.
Do you really think that all that money actually helps the schools educate people (or conduct research if you view that as the primary purpose, I'd argue that conducting research is actually in service of educating people, since by having amazing researchers you have access to cutting edge knowledge and techniques who those people and their students can teach to others) or does that money just help the schools run a very successful football and basketball program?
You seem to despise the NCAA. I agree they are a terrible organization. One way to destroy them completely would be to ban the entire concept (or just never introduce it in the first place) of a semi pro sports team being run by a university. Which is what every other nation on earth has done. Every other sport and country just has proper developmental leagues with no ties to universities. Why don't we just do that?
Because we have 200+ years of history with that system, and it's really hard to just blow that up? It would be far easier at this point to reform the existing system.
The only 'reform' which seems to be fair in the eyes of people who hate the NCAA like angelhedgie (and hating them for what they are now is sensible) seems to be...
1) Players on the team negotiate their own pay, salary and benefits
2) Players retain their image and name license
3) Players can transfer teams and so on
4) Teams are responsible for player health and safety
5) Teams can't set morality requirements and like, fire people for being part of black lives matter or smoking a joint
Effectively saying that being a college sports player should just be a job, and (angelhedgie would argue I'm sure) a pretty well paid job at that.
To which my counter would be, well, if its going to be good job then why can only people who go to the university do it? Why do they have to quit after 4 years of play? Why can't anyone apply, negotiate a contract, and get to work. Why can't they just keep their jobs? What if I can't cut it in the NFL, why can't I just go back to 'College ball'. What if a college team can pay more than an NFL team for a player? Why can't the 'college league' be the top league.
Access to research grant based on football performance is not a fucking features, it's a disaster. It means that money is not allocated based on the worth of the project. Interesting and relevant projects are not getting funded because of this, while lesser projects are being funded.
This is bad. It harms research. The world is worst because of it.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
I'm just trying to put a marker on the ground here to see why we even NEED any kind of organized college sport beyond just letting the sport team chat with freshers at the club meeting during freshers week is.
Do you really think that all that money actually helps the schools educate people (or conduct research if you view that as the primary purpose, I'd argue that conducting research is actually in service of educating people, since by having amazing researchers you have access to cutting edge knowledge and techniques who those people and their students can teach to others) or does that money just help the schools run a very successful football and basketball program?
You seem to despise the NCAA. I agree they are a terrible organization. One way to destroy them completely would be to ban the entire concept (or just never introduce it in the first place) of a semi pro sports team being run by a university. Which is what every other nation on earth has done. Every other sport and country just has proper developmental leagues with no ties to universities. Why don't we just do that?
Because we have 200+ years of history with that system, and it's really hard to just blow that up? It would be far easier at this point to reform the existing system.
The only 'reform' which seems to be fair in the eyes of people who hate the NCAA like angelhedgie (and hating them for what they are now is sensible) seems to be...
1) Players on the team negotiate their own pay, salary and benefits
2) Players retain their image and name license
3) Players can transfer teams and so on
4) Teams are responsible for player health and safety
5) Teams can't set morality requirements and like, fire people for being part of black lives matter or smoking a joint
Effectively saying that being a college sports player should just be a job, and (angelhedgie would argue I'm sure) a pretty well paid job at that.
To which my counter would be, well, if its going to be good job then why can only people who go to the university do it? Why do they have to quit after 4 years of play? Why can't anyone apply, negotiate a contract, and get to work. Why can't they just keep their jobs? What if I can't cut it in the NFL, why can't I just go back to 'College ball'. What if a college team can pay more than an NFL team for a player? Why can't the 'college league' be the top league.
I don't really see how your list of questions actually argues against treating players as employees.
Access to research grant based on football performance is not a fucking features, it's a disaster. It means that money is not allocated based on the worth of the project. Interesting and relevant projects are not getting funded because of this, while lesser projects are being funded.
This is bad. It harms research. The world is worst because of it.
Nah it more pushes the elite researchers to places that are also good at sports (or are an Ivy, MIT, or Cal Tech).
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
+2
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
Technically, it's a system designed to extract as much money as possible without giving anything of value to the student
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
None of what you have stated are inherent in the system, but are all due to abuses.
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
Technically, it's a system designed to extract as much money as possible without giving anything of value to the student
Well, it's good at giving them concussions and other long term wounds. That has value. Negative numbers are still numbers.
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
Or it helps creates kids like this. Or poor fucking Devin Gardner who got a masters in social work in three and a half years while being the starting QB on some of the worst teams in school history and getting absolutely blasted for it in the media and among the fanbase. And his high school was shut down the year after he graduated. That kid never gets a chance at any college if he wasn't a great high school football player.
It's definitely both ways, I knew athletes who were genuinely working their asses off to get a good education and were in the tutoring services genuinely doing the work on a weekly basis. There were also those who skated by and did very little but got credit anyway.
The system is fucking stupid, but it genuinely provides a great opportunity for especially kids who are not quite NFL/NBA/NHL talented. Like coming to the US and getting a four year degree for free is better than tooling around the AHL for years for a bunch of Canadian kids who have come through the NCAA. So you build on that and pay them for their friggin' labor.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Treating college athletics as a professional sport just fucks up people's education, since the threat of transferring schools is far mroe detrimental to the individual students education then anything else. It also brings up the issue of how a professional athlete even has time to study given their training regime. Plus the whole thing where only students can be these athletes. And any educational requirements just incentivize rampant academic corruption.
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
Or it helps creates kids like this. Or poor fucking Devin Gardner who got a masters in social work in three and a half years while being the starting QB on some of the worst teams in school history and getting absolutely blasted for it in the media and among the fanbase. And his high school was shut down the year after he graduated. That kid never gets a chance at any college if he wasn't a great high school football player.
It's definitely both ways, I knew athletes who were genuinely working their asses off to get a good education and were in the tutoring services genuinely doing the work on a weekly basis. There were also those who skated by and did very little but got credit anyway.
The system is fucking stupid, but it genuinely provides a great opportunity for especially kids who are not quite NFL/NBA/NHL talented. Like coming to the US and getting a four year degree for free is better than tooling around the AHL for years for a bunch of Canadian kids who have come through the NCAA. So you build on that and pay them for their friggin' labor.
A system that only gives a few poor kids an education, assuming the can play football well enough, and that they have the opportunity to play football in the first place, is not a good thing.
An actual solution to the problem is a good system of public education, financed by a sufficient tax rate. That's what we do in developed countries. It's not perfect, but at least it's an attempt at universal access to education, rather than a system explicitly designed to limit access to the not-poor and a few athletes.
Posts
I would assume they idiotically believe it takes away from the TV/radio experience from their corporate partners at ESPN? Even though ESPN tweets every fucking thing they air, with highlights.
Here's the NCAA rule in all its asinine glory:
{Twitter, Everybody's doing it. }{Writing and Story Blog}
They probably just don't want anyone who isn't them to ever have a chance of profiting.
The tournament is currently ongoing, the one time it IS on TV. That's what prompted that. Softball too.
I have an answer as to why it keeps popping up - your office does jack shit to correct the problem!
1)
And that's the only thing schools can do about transfers under NCAA rules. Conferences can be more restrictive. I know the Big Ten is not.
2) Football players may play in up to four games and not have that year count against their eligibility. Not a huge moral thing, but a nice change that creates less uncertainty with medical redshirt applications and stuff.
Adios, you horrible goose.
Their argument is simple - the sort of recruiting problems that led to the vacation of the championship are ultimately due to the NCAA's rules regarding "amateurism" distorting the issue, and that the NCAA should fix things by reforming, not punishing players.
In follow-up, Papa John has resigned from everything, in response to failing as hard as humanly possible at sensitivity training.
Yes, this would be an improvement, but only because the current NCAA model is utterly reprehensible. In this system, players would effectively be covered by a single institutional agent, which would be set up to not work in the players' interest by its very structure:
And that's not even getting to the wage theft:
This is a complete nonstarter. Those players have earned that money - to say that they don't get it if they leave the school for any reason other than matriculation is theft, plain and simple.
This proposal shows, once again, that the only solution to the NCAA is breaking it.
Brought this over because it's more applicable here.
The reality is that in the US, collegiate sports predated the pro leagues - the only two pro sports I can think of that really predate the growth of collegiate sports are baseball and ice hockey, and unsurprisingly they are the sports that have their own development paths. Universities are also part of their communities as well, which is what helped drive the popularity of college sports. College sports have over a century of history being a point of focus and unity for communities - that genie isn't going back in the bottle.
Also, the problem isn't the money, but the dishonesty of how the NCAA operates.
How is it not related to their function? The role of the university, at least in the US, goes beyond being just a center of learning.
That is a really bad analogy, so let's drop it. The problem is that the NCAA continues to impose unreasonable rules on both players and schools because it wants to have its cake and eat it too. And the answer is to break the NCAA and get rid of these rules, instead forcing the schools to deal with players fairly.
To me the question is this. The purpose of having universities is the education of young people to become valuable members of society. All sorts of 'sub motivations' exist in the US and are why we have say, private colleges and what not, but anything which exists in the university system should benefit its prime mission. Educating young people.
If we want to keep 'big money college sports' as a thing which exists (IE, why don't we deal with the NCAA problem by just banning the NCAA, saying that there will be no more sports scholarships, that teams can't train+play more than 10 hours a week, and that teams will be treated like any other club and be expected to manage their own revenue and pay their own staff if they exist etc) then can we prove that having all this big money stuff actually helps schools educate students?
It certainly say, helps them hire expensive coaches. Or, helps them pull in donors to build stadiums and so on. But does it actually get money on the table for more lecturers and more academic scholarships and so on.
Everything else come from the fact that you are trying to use a model based on students, rather than employees, in an organisation structured to administer research and education, to act as a sports league.
You are literally taking a structure where sports are supposed to be nothing more than a hobby, something to do between classes, and then taking it seriously and throwing money at it.
On top of that, you have people who cares more about sports than education clamouring for more and more. You call those "fans" and "alumni".
It's always going to be corrupt, because the whole structure is absurd and fundamentally dysfunctional.
The problem is that the NCAA exists in the first place because it creates incredible incentives to do exactly what they are doing, provides tons of cover for it and puts labourers/students in really awkward situations where they lack real agency or options.
Let's go with the hospital analogy. It's like your hospital has a sports team attached to it made of of residents. Some of whom aren't even trying to be doctors.
Except that "educating young people" is only one mission of the university (and one that is not really respected by academia, given things like publish or perish continuing to dominate.) And this idea that killing collegiate sports will free up money is rather absurd - a lot of that funding would just vanish. Part of the whole fiasco in Lansing was that the MSU administration was using success on the field to drive fundraising to bootstrap the university as a research institution, which is why blind eyes were turned.
The reality is that college sports - especially football - have been big business for over a century now. Pro football teams have struggled in LA in large part because it's been a college town since the turn of the 20th century. This genie is out of the bottle.
So you need to figure out how to actually make the system equitable. And that goes to actually paying the people generating the money.
Also: big time college sports is one of the few socially acceptable ways to get poor (black) kids an elite education. Because America is awesome.
I'm just trying to put a marker on the ground here to see why we even NEED any kind of organized college sport beyond just letting the sport team chat with freshers at the club meeting during freshers week is.
Do you really think that all that money actually helps the schools educate people (or conduct research if you view that as the primary purpose, I'd argue that conducting research is actually in service of educating people, since by having amazing researchers you have access to cutting edge knowledge and techniques who those people and their students can teach to others) or does that money just help the schools run a very successful football and basketball program?
You seem to despise the NCAA. I agree they are a terrible organization. One way to destroy them completely would be to ban the entire concept (or just never introduce it in the first place) of a semi pro sports team being run by a university. Which is what every other nation on earth has done. Every other sport and country just has proper developmental leagues with no ties to universities. Why don't we just do that?
Because we have 200+ years of history with that system, and it's really hard to just blow that up? It would be far easier at this point to reform the existing system.
If the teams are SO important, then fine. Let them stay. Let them keep the names. They now manage themselves, hire their own staff, and just give 10% gross revenue to the schools for the privilege of using the school names. No more scholarships. If the NCAA is so awful, then the salaries the kids end up with at the teams should be more than enough for them to pay for themselves to go to college later in life.
You have somehow come up with a worse system. Which is actually remarkable.
The solution is actually super easy to think about, just harder to implement, which is that you reduce coaching payscales in the big time sports, knock out a ton of useless bloat in the administration of athletic departments (also a larger university problem!) and then pay players the revenue they're generating while continuing to provide them a free education.
Meanwhile because of how America works, having successful athletic teams does improve your ability to do research, which lets you attract the best faculty, which lets you better educate your students. College athletics builds a sense of community within the alumni and makes them more likely to donate. It also attracts more applications, small schools that make the Final Four in men's basketball consistently see more applications in the following years. So it also creates more alumni. Who then give back to the school, they have more money to build state of the art buildings or fund interesting research to attract the best faculty.
Kind of ironically since it highlights some of the worst parts of the NCAA system, Penn State is the absolute best example of this. They got into the Big Ten by being really good at football. By getting into the Big Ten they got into the Big Ten Academic Alliance (at the time the CIC) which is a research consortium that lobbies for federal research dollars. And does really well at it. In the last 25 years, PSU has gone from a pretty good state school to an elite research institution, largely on the back of that alliance.
Is this the system you'd design if you were building from the ground up? No, it is not. But it's what we have and we have to work within it.
The only 'reform' which seems to be fair in the eyes of people who hate the NCAA like angelhedgie (and hating them for what they are now is sensible) seems to be...
1) Players on the team negotiate their own pay, salary and benefits
2) Players retain their image and name license
3) Players can transfer teams and so on
4) Teams are responsible for player health and safety
5) Teams can't set morality requirements and like, fire people for being part of black lives matter or smoking a joint
Effectively saying that being a college sports player should just be a job, and (angelhedgie would argue I'm sure) a pretty well paid job at that.
To which my counter would be, well, if its going to be good job then why can only people who go to the university do it? Why do they have to quit after 4 years of play? Why can't anyone apply, negotiate a contract, and get to work. Why can't they just keep their jobs? What if I can't cut it in the NFL, why can't I just go back to 'College ball'. What if a college team can pay more than an NFL team for a player? Why can't the 'college league' be the top league.
This is bad. It harms research. The world is worst because of it.
I don't really see how your list of questions actually argues against treating players as employees.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
Nah it more pushes the elite researchers to places that are also good at sports (or are an Ivy, MIT, or Cal Tech).
It's a system designed to create professional athletes being given a subpar education in swahili.
Technically, it's a system designed to extract as much money as possible without giving anything of value to the student
None of what you have stated are inherent in the system, but are all due to abuses.
Or it helps creates kids like this. Or poor fucking Devin Gardner who got a masters in social work in three and a half years while being the starting QB on some of the worst teams in school history and getting absolutely blasted for it in the media and among the fanbase. And his high school was shut down the year after he graduated. That kid never gets a chance at any college if he wasn't a great high school football player.
It's definitely both ways, I knew athletes who were genuinely working their asses off to get a good education and were in the tutoring services genuinely doing the work on a weekly basis. There were also those who skated by and did very little but got credit anyway.
The system is fucking stupid, but it genuinely provides a great opportunity for especially kids who are not quite NFL/NBA/NHL talented. Like coming to the US and getting a four year degree for free is better than tooling around the AHL for years for a bunch of Canadian kids who have come through the NCAA. So you build on that and pay them for their friggin' labor.
A system that only gives a few poor kids an education, assuming the can play football well enough, and that they have the opportunity to play football in the first place, is not a good thing.
An actual solution to the problem is a good system of public education, financed by a sufficient tax rate. That's what we do in developed countries. It's not perfect, but at least it's an attempt at universal access to education, rather than a system explicitly designed to limit access to the not-poor and a few athletes.