Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 29 FirstFirst 12345612 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 433

Thread: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

  1. #16
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by dabvu2498 View Post
    Delaney also said the Big 10 wouldn't expand.
    Talk about blowing smoke here. Sure, he's got the Big 10 network, but he's going to go the way of the Ivy League. Well, OSU does have a rowing team and the Olentangy River, I guess. I doubt if too many people want to watch that on a regular basis. Maybe he can also have some competitive chess programming in addition to the weekend football games attended by 6,500 family and friends.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  2. Likes:

    Revering4Blue (03-19-2013)

  3. Turn Off Ads?
  4. #17
    Winning is fun.
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Urbana, OH
    Posts
    805

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    You don't have to pay the players... just stop prohibiting them from making money from outside ventures. They should be able to do card signings, endorsements, etc.

  5. #18
    Waitin til next year bucksfan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    10,178

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverRat13 View Post
    You don't have to pay the players... just stop prohibiting them from making money from outside ventures. They should be able to do card signings, endorsements, etc.
    How. Sure if they want to do an event where they charge $10 for an autograph then I don't have an issue with it. They can sign their name for hours. But what happens when some booster comes in and gives them $10K for an autograph? What happens when some booster decides that he wants to buy a game used jersey for $10K.

    What happens when Johnny Manziel says I didn't sign enough autographs last week I don't think I am going to play this week? What happens when an OSU booster says I will guarantee you $20K for doing these 3 autograph sessions? Its a slippery slope that would end badly.

    Here is what I would do and don't have an issue with. I believe a video game started everything. If they use the likeliness of a certain player then you put a certain amount of the proceeds into a trust that the players are able to access when their eligibility expires. I would look at doing something similar with jersey's but its a little murkier.

  6. #19
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Amateur athletics are out of whack at all levels because mommy's and daddy's want Jr. to be the next one to buy them their dream house after he is a first round pick in the draft. It would not make me sad if the status quo was eliminated, but there's too much money in big time NCAA for it to ever get to where Delaney is talking. He's just posturing, and making himself look like a self-righteous hypocrite in the process.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  7. Likes:

    Chip R (03-20-2013), Revering4Blue (03-20-2013), Roy Tucker (03-23-2013)

  8. #20
    Winning is fun.
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Urbana, OH
    Posts
    805

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by bucksfan2 View Post
    How. Sure if they want to do an event where they charge $10 for an autograph then I don't have an issue with it. They can sign their name for hours. But what happens when some booster comes in and gives them $10K for an autograph? What happens when some booster decides that he wants to buy a game used jersey for $10K.

    What happens when Johnny Manziel says I didn't sign enough autographs last week I don't think I am going to play this week? What happens when an OSU booster says I will guarantee you $20K for doing these 3 autograph sessions? Its a slippery slope that would end badly.
    Who cares? If a booster wants to spend his money that way then so be it. Right now, the booster just gives that $10k to the school itself so that the football or basketball program can have the nicest and newest facilities to attract recruits. Why not just bypass the middle man and let the kids get the money?

  9. #21
    Unsolicited Opinions traderumor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Right Down Broadway
    Posts
    18,667

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Amateur status gets lost in all this posturing about paying players. I also think "exploitation" is a pretty strong word. Exploitation is paying the poor wages that keep them at poverty or worse, or child labor, or human trafficing. There is a lot of value received by athletes, whether it be revenue stream sports or cost line athletics. Athletic scholarships, travel, sports equipment, use of facilities, etc. all have a value. Sure, let the players become independent contractors, then have them pay for their equipment, rent the training facilities, pay tuition, living expenses, meals, travel, etc. I bet they'd be in the hole if they want to play that game.

    What the players want is a paid free ride. Pay me like a professional athlete. Well, if you can earn your living as a professional athlete, go for it. Otherwise, you're just going to have to settle for the thousands of dollars in benefits you get from a university because you have some special athletic skill. Or better yet, eliminate the athletic scholarship and make them compete for tuition helps like the rest of us, who paid for every freaking service they ever got from The State University. Sorry, not crying no rivers for these poor athletes getting a free ride, which is so much more than just paying for their tuition.

    Let them all be "walk-ons."

    And the O'Bannon, et al test case, while he gets his, and the attorney gets theirs, who gets disenfranchised yet again? The inner city, the poor, the minorities. Do we really want to go back there so the fortunate few can get a paycheck for playing a sport while they are in college? The lawsuit and the concept would be a travesty to those whom athletic scholarships provide a hand up out of generational poverty.
    Last edited by traderumor; 03-20-2013 at 02:12 PM.
    Can't win with 'em

    Can't win without 'em

  10. Likes:

    Old school 1983 (06-22-2014)

  11. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    297

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    as if getting paid $40 grand a year for a free education/room and board/books and food/dinning hall isnt enough. Thats more than most college graduates make right out of college.

    But if these players are going to get paid how will it work? Will they get a share of ticket gate for the game? and will a QB make more than a bench player? will walk ons make anything? will players not receiving a full scholarship but only a part scholarship receive the same as someone on a full scholarship?

    And then keep in mind title IX...is this going to create a lawsuit or controversy that guys basketball will make more than womans basketball?

    And then if they do get paid how will that work? When will they get paid? I know for a fact if I grew up with not much money and then all of a sudden at 18 years old living by myself in a dorm I get paid a lot of money, chances are im going to blow it and it will be a distraction more than anything.. So with that said will the money go into a booster, or whatever you want to call it, and the players can collect their share at the end of 4 years? giving you more of an incentive to stay and get your degree. and then giving you money when you get out as a starter fund for yourself and to walk out of college with a degree and $$..

    But then what happens if you dont stay 4 years? do you still get anything? But the biggest thing to keep in mind is that these athletes are still making $40 + grand a year on an education and the whole 9 yards. So that still needs to be equated into the decision making process

  12. #23
    Member improbus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    2,082

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    There are some strange elements to all of this stuff that I don't understand, and they all involve the fans.

    1) Why do the we care that the players are amateurs? (And even stranger, why are we okay with an education as compensation for being good at football and basketball and not okay with money?)
    2) Do any of us actually care in any real sense that the players are getting an education, or does it simply make us feel better about a corrupted system? The only times education ever comes up in conversation about "college" athletics are when you brag about how many athletes your school graduates or make fun of another school for not graduating enough/any players.
    3) Why do we take the side of the institution over the kids? I can't think of anyone who sided with Terrell Pryor over the school. We fans cheer for the kids until they do something that might potentially harm our favorite team.(unlike Jim Tressel, who went down with his players).

    Also, here are a few interesting reads about this topic. I was particularly amazed at the estimated "value" of the average athlete to their schools.

    http://www.finaid.org/educators/2011...holarships.pdf
    http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/09/...es-in-poverty/
    Variatio delectat - Cicero

  13. Likes:

    coachpipe (03-20-2013)

  14. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, IN
    Posts
    7,188

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by traderumor View Post
    Amateur status gets lost in all this posturing about paying players. I also think "exploitation" is a pretty strong word. Exploitation is paying the poor wages that keep them at poverty or worse, or child labor, or human trafficing. There is a lot of value received by athletes, whether it be revenue stream sports or cost line athletics. Athletic scholarships, travel, sports equipment, use of facilities, etc. all have a value. Sure, let the players become independent contractors, then have them pay for their equipment, rent the training facilities, pay tuition, living expenses, meals, travel, etc. I bet they'd be in the hole if they want to play that game.

    What the players want is a paid free ride. Pay me like a professional athlete. Well, if you can earn your living as a professional athlete, go for it. Otherwise, you're just going to have to settle for the thousands of dollars in benefits you get from a university because you have some special athletic skill. Or better yet, eliminate the athletic scholarship and make them compete for tuition helps like the rest of us, who paid for every freaking service they ever got from The State University. Sorry, not crying no rivers for these poor athletes getting a free ride, which is so much more than just paying for their tuition.

    Let them all be "walk-ons."

    And the O'Bannon, et al test case, while he gets his, and the attorney gets theirs, who gets disenfranchised yet again? The inner city, the poor, the minorities. Do we really want to go back there so the fortunate few can get a paycheck for playing a sport while they are in college? The lawsuit and the concept would be a travesty to those whom athletic scholarships provide a hand up out of generational poverty.
    I agree with alot of what you say. Rarely mentioned in the discussion of value the athletes receive is the value of notoriety for being associated with the team. Let's say two college graduates work as insurance salesmen.(It's a random job that a lot of recent college grads take up.) Who do you think has more success when cold calling clients? The guy who played football for THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY or the guy who cheered him on? Heck just the preferrential treatment an athlete gets when it comes to admittance to a university should be factored into any discussion of value received. Notre Dame may not let just anyone in, but if they're deciding between two "exceptions" and one happens to play football really well, who do you think is getting in?


    However I disagree with your take on Obannon's case. I don't think any greater societal impact should be factored in to the lawsuit. I don't think it's a good idea to decide for instance that someone should not have their contractual rights upheld because it might be bad for someone else.
    *Apologies if that's not what you meant.*
    When people say that I donít know what Iím talking about when it comes to sports or writing, I think: Man, you should see me in the rest of my life.
    ---Joe Posnanski

  15. #25
    Five Tool Fool jojo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    18,928

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by dabvu2498 View Post
    Delaney also said the Big 10 wouldn't expand.
    The Big 10 didn't expand. It just got bigger.
    "This isnít stats vs scouts - this is stats and scouts working together, building an organization that blends the best of both worlds. This is the blueprint for how a baseball organization should be run. And, whether the baseball men of the 20th century like it or not, this is where baseball is going."---Dave Cameron, U.S.S. Mariner

  16. Likes:

    dfs (09-26-2013)

  17. #26
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,414

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by coachpipe View Post
    as if getting paid $40 grand a year for a free education/room and board/books and food/dinning hall isnt enough. Thats more than most college graduates make right out of college.
    So what? Most college kids aren't bringing in tens of millions of dollars for their school.

    Duke basketball has what, 12 scholarships a year? They profit $15,000,000 a season. $40,000 a year is a freaking joke for what they do.

  18. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Braintree, MA
    Posts
    2,083

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    And if you started paying Duke's players $100k per year, they'd have an even more decided recruiting advantage. And the fans of other teams would be less interested in watching their teams play Duke. And Duke's fans would get less interested pretty quick, too, because no one else is interested in watching their pro team play.

    And pretty soon Duke isn't making $15 million anymore. And now they can't afford scholarships for any student athletes. So the rest of the athletics programs suffer. And then schools just become schools again.

    Hell, maybe that's the right place to end up, but it's a lot less interesting than what we have now.

  19. Likes:

    coachpipe (03-21-2013)

  20. #28
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,466

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    College educations are nearly worthless. Nobody is impressed with a Kent State degree or whatever, it's not opening the doors it opened in 1955.

    It's incredible to me how this argument seems to devolve into people crying about how much they paid for their education, therefore athletes should be satisfied to get theirs for free, ignoring that the athletes have value to the college.

    You do not. If you did, academically or athletically, you'd have a scholarship. Your value to the university is your tuition.

    The NCAA is in the middle of a 14 year, $10.8 billion, with a b, television deal for March Madness. I'm guessing a postseason football tournament would sell for a similar amount. And the kids get nothing. It's honestly astonishing, and I try not to think about it, because it ruins college athletics for me when I do.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  21. Likes:

    dougdirt (03-20-2013)

  22. #29
    A Little to the Left Redsfaithful's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Bexley, OH
    Posts
    7,466

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Duke and Kentucky already get all the blue chip recruits, it's tough for me to see how they would get even better recruits if they started paying players. Weird argument.
    We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
    --Oscar Wilde

  23. #30
    The Boss dougdirt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    35,414

    Re: O'Bannon v. NCAA (aka Could Ohio State go D3)

    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Red View Post
    And if you started paying Duke's players $100k per year, they'd have an even more decided recruiting advantage. And the fans of other teams would be less interested in watching their teams play Duke. And Duke's fans would get less interested pretty quick, too, because no one else is interested in watching their pro team play.

    And pretty soon Duke isn't making $15 million anymore. And now they can't afford scholarships for any student athletes. So the rest of the athletics programs suffer. And then schools just become schools again.

    Hell, maybe that's the right place to end up, but it's a lot less interesting than what we have now.
    Then cut all sports. I simply can't understand how it is ok to tell people who are bringing in that kind of money they are worth $10-40,000 a year in a free education, while the mens vollyball team gets the exact same benefits from the school and costs them a million bucks a year. In what other business environment do the employees losing money hand over fist get paid the same as the ones bringing in tens of millions? Only in college sports.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25