| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerLanny wrote: | Everyone is breaking the rules with the exception (maybe) of Coach K just because he doesn't have to.
Sean Miller, Self among others caught red handed, it isn't like he is being picked on. |
I do not agree that everyone or even most are breaking the rules as it relates to paying for players.....and I think Coach K benefits as much if not more than anyone from cheating. Zion was paid to attend Duke....it may have not been directly from Coach K, but nothing happens in that program without him knowing. His long time assistant Jeff Capel was long rumored to drop bags of cash on recruits to attend Duke. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 24, 2019 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I find interesting about the allegations is while the media is focused on the "lack of institutional control" allegation, I find the "head coach responsibility" allegation more interesting. In the past the Level 1 lack of institutional control has been the one feared the most and has resulted in the harshest penalties....Kansas will have the ability to defend itself against that allegation and may be able to muddy the waters enough to get off of that charge. This is the first big test of the fairly new "head coach responsibility" clause, and I am not sure how they defend Self against those charges. We have seen text messages and know for a fact players were paid to attend Kansas and the way the clause is written is the NCAA does not have to prove Self knew....because the clause ensures he is responsible for what happens within the program whether he knew or did not know.
I think the NCAA has to hit Kansas with serious probation that will last years, and I honestly think Self has to be finished at the college level for the next few years. If not, schools should interpret the rules and the NCAA's ability to govern college athletics as feckless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oklahoma State receives notice of allegations tied to corruption probe
| Quote: | Oklahoma State received a notice of allegations from the NCAA on Friday, the school announced.
The allegation includes one Level I violation involving former associate head coach Lamont Evans, who was sentenced in June to three months in prison for accepting bribes to push players to certain agents and financial advisors. Evans was among four assistant coaches arrested in September 2017 following an FBI investigation into corruption in college basketball recruiting. |
LINK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 8:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Up next.....
USC gets notice of allegations from NCAA tied to federal probe
| Quote: | USC officials acknowledged Friday that the university has received a notice of allegations from the NCAA regarding alleged violations involving its men's basketball program.
Sources previously told ESPN that USC was one of several Division I programs under investigation by the NCAA because of alleged rules violations that surfaced during two recent federal criminal cases in the Southern District of New York. |
LINK |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerLanny wrote: | It is a broken system.
Time to remove mens division I basketball and football from NCAA control and pay the players a stipend.
There is plenty of money to do so from what they generate.
The NCAA is corrupt and essentially are modern day plantation owners. |
yep, burn the ncaa down.
it needs to be done.
let the talented kids make money.
if it means losing some sports in colleges, so be it.
let the free market reign.
if certain sports are not popular enough, let them be cut. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | LakerLanny wrote: | It is a broken system.
Time to remove mens division I basketball and football from NCAA control and pay the players a stipend.
There is plenty of money to do so from what they generate.
The NCAA is corrupt and essentially are modern day plantation owners. |
yep, burn the ncaa down.
it needs to be done.
let the talented kids make money.
if it means losing some sports in colleges, so be it.
let the free market reign.
if certain sports are not popular enough, let them be cut. |
you would have to eliminate Title IX to take that action.....you good with doing away with Title IX?
Btw, NCAA D1 athletes of revenue sports already are paid monthly stipends.....which goes to the heart of the problem with this discussion....90% of the people opining with conviction have nearly zero idea what athletes are getting and not getting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144456
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | LakerLanny wrote: | It is a broken system.
Time to remove mens division I basketball and football from NCAA control and pay the players a stipend.
There is plenty of money to do so from what they generate.
The NCAA is corrupt and essentially are modern day plantation owners. |
yep, burn the ncaa down.
it needs to be done.
let the talented kids make money.
if it means losing some sports in colleges, so be it.
let the free market reign.
if certain sports are not popular enough, let them be cut. |
But Federal law prohibits “so be it”. Those sports are legally required and the University has to fund them.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | LakerLanny wrote: | It is a broken system.
Time to remove mens division I basketball and football from NCAA control and pay the players a stipend.
There is plenty of money to do so from what they generate.
The NCAA is corrupt and essentially are modern day plantation owners. |
yep, burn the ncaa down.
it needs to be done.
let the talented kids make money.
if it means losing some sports in colleges, so be it.
let the free market reign.
if certain sports are not popular enough, let them be cut. |
you would have to eliminate Title IX to take that action.....you good with doing away with Title IX?
Btw, NCAA D1 athletes of revenue sports already are paid monthly stipends.....which goes to the heart of the problem with this discussion....90% of the people opining with conviction have nearly zero idea what athletes are getting and not getting. |
who said the athletic programs of schools have to 'break even'.
does the philosophy department break even?
this is a creation of the ncaa to justify not paying market rates.
if certain schools decide to cut women's sports due to the market.
let it be.
let schools differentiate themselves with the classes, sports etc that they offer.
then prospective students, whether male or female, athlete or non-athlete, can choose their school based on what the school offers.
this is what happens when you have a market inefficiency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 4:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | LakerLanny wrote: | It is a broken system.
Time to remove mens division I basketball and football from NCAA control and pay the players a stipend.
There is plenty of money to do so from what they generate.
The NCAA is corrupt and essentially are modern day plantation owners. |
yep, burn the ncaa down.
it needs to be done.
let the talented kids make money.
if it means losing some sports in colleges, so be it.
let the free market reign.
if certain sports are not popular enough, let them be cut. |
But Federal law prohibits “so be it”. Those sports are legally required and the University has to fund them. |
well if that is the case, then that is fine.
who said athlete programs have to break even?
does the philosophy department break even?
students pay tuition.
value has been created for certain sports.
the 'students' are not receiving fair value for their talents, time and risk.
each school can do their own budget.
it does not justify turning students into slaves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144456
Location: The Gold Coast
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 12:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No one said anything about breaking even, just that Universities have to fund certain sports. Eliminating them isn’t an option.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | No one said anything about breaking even, just that Universities have to fund certain sports. Eliminating them isn’t an option. |
That is not exactly true, but I'm being a little nitpicky. There is no requirement that a university have any specific sport, and a university could absolutely eliminate any and all sports programs. Title IX requires proportionate opportunities, but does not dictate how a university achieves that result. But as I said, I'm being a little nitpicky.
In the bigger picture, this just illustrates what is wrong with the status quo. If this was a free market scenario involving private businesses running sports programs, then what Cal is saying makes perfect sense. But instead it is happening in the context of universities, most of which are public institutions. Private businesses would not get in trouble for paying their players, but on the other hand private businesses would be required to pay their players. That was a weird sentence, but it captures the essence of the problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| venturalakersfan wrote: | | No one said anything about breaking even, just that Universities have to fund certain sports. Eliminating them isn’t an option. |
one ncaa justification for not paying student athletes is that $ is needed for paying for other programs that loses money.
that implies that there is a need to breakeven, which is ridiculous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | venturalakersfan wrote: | | No one said anything about breaking even, just that Universities have to fund certain sports. Eliminating them isn’t an option. |
That is not exactly true, but I'm being a little nitpicky. There is no requirement that a university have any specific sport, and a university could absolutely eliminate any and all sports programs. Title IX requires proportionate opportunities, but does not dictate how a university achieves that result. But as I said, I'm being a little nitpicky.
In the bigger picture, this just illustrates what is wrong with the status quo. If this was a free market scenario involving private businesses running sports programs, then what Cal is saying makes perfect sense. But instead it is happening in the context of universities, most of which are public institutions. Private businesses would not get in trouble for paying their players, but on the other hand private businesses would be required to pay their players. That was a weird sentence, but it captures the essence of the problem. |
this is interesting. are you saying that for public institutions, expenditures for certain programs must = expenditures for other programs.
while such a stipulation is non-optimal, there would be ways to achieve that.
however, i still dont see any strict requirement where student athletes cannot be paid for public institutions.
are you saying then that private schools must pay athletes? that does not make sense to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | this is interesting. are you saying that for public institutions, expenditures for certain programs must = expenditures for other programs.
while such a stipulation is non-optimal, there would be ways to achieve that.
however, i still dont see any strict requirement where student athletes cannot be paid for public institutions.
are you saying then that private schools must pay athletes? that does not make sense to me. |
1. Title IX requires proportionate opportunities. Here's how the NCAA explains it:
| Quote: | Athletics programs are considered educational programs and activities. There are three basic parts of Title IX as it applies to athletics:
Participation: Title IX requires that women and men be provided equitable opportunities to participate in sports. Title IX does not require institutions to offer identical sports but an equal opportunity to play;
Scholarships: Title IX requires that female and male student-athletes receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation; and
Other benefits: Title IX requires the equal treatment of female and male student-athletes in the provisions of: (a) equipment and supplies; (b) scheduling of games and practice times; (c) travel and daily allowance/per diem; (d) access to tutoring; (e) coaching, (f) locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; (g) medical and training facilities and services; (h) housing and dining facilities and services; (i) publicity and promotions; (j) support services and (k) recruitment of student-athletes. |
2. I was talking about private businesses, not private schools. If I started up a football league, I would not be subject to Title IX requirements, but I would be required to pay my players because they would be employees. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | this is interesting. are you saying that for public institutions, expenditures for certain programs must = expenditures for other programs.
while such a stipulation is non-optimal, there would be ways to achieve that.
however, i still dont see any strict requirement where student athletes cannot be paid for public institutions.
are you saying then that private schools must pay athletes? that does not make sense to me. |
1. Title IX requires proportionate opportunities. Here's how the NCAA explains it:
| Quote: | Athletics programs are considered educational programs and activities. There are three basic parts of Title IX as it applies to athletics:
Participation: Title IX requires that women and men be provided equitable opportunities to participate in sports. Title IX does not require institutions to offer identical sports but an equal opportunity to play;
Scholarships: Title IX requires that female and male student-athletes receive athletics scholarship dollars proportional to their participation; and
Other benefits: Title IX requires the equal treatment of female and male student-athletes in the provisions of: (a) equipment and supplies; (b) scheduling of games and practice times; (c) travel and daily allowance/per diem; (d) access to tutoring; (e) coaching, (f) locker rooms, practice and competitive facilities; (g) medical and training facilities and services; (h) housing and dining facilities and services; (i) publicity and promotions; (j) support services and (k) recruitment of student-athletes. |
2. I was talking about private businesses, not private schools. If I started up a football league, I would not be subject to Title IX requirements, but I would be required to pay my players because they would be employees. |
thanks for the explanation.
so basically the government has gotten in the business of legislating socialist benefits for student athletes.
that certainly helps the universities control their 'assets'
i guess then the other areas where they can extract their value is in marketing rights, and that is why states are going there.
wow high school athletes should really consider playing in europe, china or australia.
this is utterly ridiculous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: |
so basically the government has gotten in the business of legislating socialist benefits for student athletes.
that certainly helps the universities control their 'assets'
i guess then the other areas where they can extract their value is in marketing rights, and that is why states are going there.
wow high school athletes should really consider playing in europe, china or australia.
this is utterly ridiculous. |
Socialist benefits? Not really. This is the point I made earlier. The colleges all claim that they have an educational mission and that the players are student athletes, Title IX forces them to live up to it. They are required to give proportionate opportunities to men and women.
I am no fan of the hypocrisy of college athletics. The kids in the revenue sports are indeed assets for the schools, as you say. The schools evade the usual rules that would apply to sports leagues by hiding behind the illusion of amateurism. This is breaking down, slowly but surely. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: |
so basically the government has gotten in the business of legislating socialist benefits for student athletes.
that certainly helps the universities control their 'assets'
i guess then the other areas where they can extract their value is in marketing rights, and that is why states are going there.
wow high school athletes should really consider playing in europe, china or australia.
this is utterly ridiculous. |
Socialist benefits? Not really. This is the point I made earlier. The colleges all claim that they have an educational mission and that the players are student athletes, Title IX forces them to live up to it. They are required to give proportionate opportunities to men and women.
I am no fan of the hypocrisy of college athletics. The kids in the revenue sports are indeed assets for the schools, as you say. The schools evade the usual rules that would apply to sports leagues by hiding behind the illusion of amateurism. This is breaking down, slowly but surely. |
it is socialist or even communist if everyone gets the same benefit without regard to ability or market demand.
does title ix forces schools to live up to it.
or is title ix a product of the schools and their lobbyists?
the system tempts everyone to cheat and commit fraud of some sort.
and now we will fruits of said market imperfection and temptation |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 11:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | it is socialist or even communist if everyone gets the same benefit without regard to ability or market demand.
does title ix forces schools to live up to it.
or is title ix a product of the schools and their lobbyists?
the system tempts everyone to cheat and commit fraud of some sort.
and now we will fruits of said market imperfection and temptation |
I sort of see your point, but I'm not sold on the idea that requiring colleges to offer proportionate athletic opportunities to women is socialistic. That implicitly assumes that colleges are legitimately in the business of marketing sports. But if that is true, then the whole concept of amateurism collapses. This is the tension underlying the issues with the revenue sports. If amateurism is legitimate, and if sports are part of the educational mission, then market forces (as you put it, market demand) are beside the point. Some sports generate revenue while most do not, but the educational mission is the same for all of them.
Anyway, Title IX is most definitely not a product of the schools and their lobbyists. Instead, the concept of amateurism is what the colleges and their lobbyists keep pushing. For most sports, it's not an issue. For the revenue sports, it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | it is socialist or even communist if everyone gets the same benefit without regard to ability or market demand.
does title ix forces schools to live up to it.
or is title ix a product of the schools and their lobbyists?
the system tempts everyone to cheat and commit fraud of some sort.
and now we will fruits of said market imperfection and temptation |
I sort of see your point, but I'm not sold on the idea that requiring colleges to offer proportionate athletic opportunities to women is socialistic. That implicitly assumes that colleges are legitimately in the business of marketing sports. But if that is true, then the whole concept of amateurism collapses. This is the tension underlying the issues with the revenue sports. If amateurism is legitimate, and if sports are part of the educational mission, then market forces (as you put it, market demand) are beside the point. Some sports generate revenue while most do not, but the educational mission is the same for all of them.
Anyway, Title IX is most definitely not a product of the schools and their lobbyists. Instead, the concept of amateurism is what the colleges and their lobbyists keep pushing. For most sports, it's not an issue. For the revenue sports, it is. |
for a few sports, men's basketball, football, the game has become big business. i am not sure for women's basketball, whether it has become a big enough business to qualify.
when big dollars are involved, my personal belief is that amateurism is gone. and not treating it as such invites serious trouble like we are seeing now.
i think these particular sports should lose its amateurism. the sport should be removed from the university and athlete made into employees of something like a non-profit with an association with the university. that gets rid of the title 9 requirements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| cal1piggy wrote: | | when big dollars are involved, my personal belief is that amateurism is gone. and not treating it as such invites serious trouble like we are seeing now. |
I came to that conclusion in the '80s. When Southern Methodist University got the death penalty because of rampant corruption and coverups arising out of payments to players, it was obvious to me that we had passed the point of no return. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cal1piggy
Star Player
Joined: 19 Jul 2017
Posts: 2584
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | cal1piggy wrote: | | when big dollars are involved, my personal belief is that amateurism is gone. and not treating it as such invites serious trouble like we are seeing now. |
I came to that conclusion in the '80s. When Southern Methodist University got the death penalty because of rampant corruption and coverups arising out of payments to players, it was obvious to me that we had passed the point of no return. |
yes it is doomed to happen. i dont see legal issues of having athletes employees of an assoicated non-profit where they are paid. i think foundations related the many universities get around a lot of the constraints.
and there can still be scholarships where the foundation pays for tuition etc. and it leverages the school for marketing.
what is lacked is a will to do it with the money involved. i have met many school administrators, and it is all about $, buildings, etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve
Starting Rotation
Joined: 20 Oct 2003
Posts: 330
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2019 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'd like to see Title IX amended to force schools to pay the football coach the same amount as the woman's softball coach. It's obviously not an amateur sport when the football coach is making 20X of what the average faculty member. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
TCU.....Come on down....
TCU basketball the latest program to receive Notice of Allegations from NCAA
| Quote: | | The number of men's basketball programs under NCAA scrutiny related to the federal investigation of corruption within the sport has risen to five after TCU acknowledged to Sports Illustrated on Wednesday that it has received a Notice of Allegations (NOA) from the NCAA. The other four programs publicly known to have received an NOA related to the investigation are Oklahoma State, NC State, USC and Kansas. |
LINK
at this rate, there will be 3 schools in the 2022 Big 12 Basketball Tournament... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 08, 2020 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm a little surprised that TCU was mixed up in this debacle. It's not that TCU is some squeaky clean program, but rather that TCU has never been much of a basketball school in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
