Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

Jim Delaney

Posted: 6/21/2014 10:42 AM

Jim Delaney 


I have knew respect for Jim Delaney he actuially went to court the other day and didnt just toll the company line. He was honest and truthful. While he didnt come out and say payers should be payed he admitted that the system is broken and enough emphasis is not placed on academics and these players are not regular students. He also stated that paying players part of licensing money is not goiung to damage college athletics the way the NCAA would like people to think.

I think its obvious now more then ever the NCAA is getting there butts kicked in this trial and if they some how win its going to be because of something shady. Its also obvious that sooner or later the power 5 is going to break away from the NCAA and govern themselves. Its no longer a matter of if but when it will go down. Players are going to get paid sooner or later people have to wrap there minds around it. These presidents, AD's and commissioners made it all about money and less about education a long time ago and now its time to poney up.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 1:07 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 1:58 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


I think SubFan is with you.

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 3:44 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


   

Junior DE Shilique Calhoun &
Sophomore OLB James Onwualu

Reply | Quote
  • rbiddie
  • Took Ball/Went Home
  • 3458 posts this site

Posted: 6/21/2014 6:27 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Speaking about the Big-5


This is why BYU is scrambling trying to beg the Big-12 to let them in.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 11:21 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 11:36 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Incorrect. I feel the need to point out that I myself have always been of the opinion that if they can find an equitable way to pay the players without destroying A) Competitive parity; B) the ability of most colleges to recruit, much less play, football; and C) the academic spirit of college football and turning most of Division I into nothing more than a Semi-Pro League, then by all means we should do so.

My biggest concern with the onset of paying players to play is the possible development of a system whereby schools have to get into a bidding war for the top recruits, like Free Agents in the NFL. And where certain starters get paid millions, while everyone else gets maybe a couple hundred dollars per game. This I think would be the worst case scenario. It would be very, very bad!

If we're going to pay these guys, let's do it right:
-- Flat pay rate across the board.
-- All schools pay the same amount.
-- Money cannot be used as a recruiting enticement, only for on-field performance.
-- All players get the same amount.
-- Injured players get paid regardless.
-- And establish a tiered pay-for-play system whereby smaller schools that get a much smaller slice of the television pie aren't financially devastated, and have to give up football and basketball because they can't afford to.
dosch44 wrote: That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------


Greg "Bullet-Train" Bryant
B*tch he'll run right through you!

Last edited 6/21/2014 11:37 PM by GoldRushND

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/21/2014 11:47 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 




Then where were you in any of the 1000 threads I started?
---------------------------------------------
--- GoldRushND wrote:

Incorrect. I feel the need to point out that I myself have always been of the opinion that if they can find an equitable way to pay the players without destroying A) Competitive parity; B) the ability of most colleges to recruit, much less play, football; and C) the academic spirit of college football and turning most of Division I into nothing more than a Semi-Pro League, then by all means we should do so.

My biggest concern with the onset of paying players to play is the possible development of a system whereby schools have to get into a bidding war for the top recruits, like Free Agents in the NFL. And where certain starters get paid millions, while everyone else gets maybe a couple hundred dollars per game. This I think would be the worst case scenario. It would be very, very bad!

If we're going to pay these guys, let's do it right:
-- Flat pay rate across the board.
-- All schools pay the same amount.
-- Money cannot be used as a recruiting enticement, only for on-field performance.
-- All players get the same amount.
-- Injured players get paid regardless.
-- And establish a tiered pay-for-play system whereby smaller schools that get a much smaller slice of the television pie aren't financially devastated, and have to give up football and basketball because they can't afford to.
dosch44 wrote: That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 12:09 AM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Because like all issues that are discussed to death on this board, I eventually get tired of taking part in the same old round-and-round arguments.

But I have voiced my opinion before. I guess mine just was not an extreme enough opinion to get noticed.
dosch44 wrote:

Then where were you in any of the 1000 threads I started?
---------------------------------------------
--- GoldRushND wrote:

Incorrect. I feel the need to point out that I myself have always been of the opinion that if they can find an equitable way to pay the players without destroying A) Competitive parity; B) the ability of most colleges to recruit, much less play, football; and C) the academic spirit of college football and turning most of Division I into nothing more than a Semi-Pro League, then by all means we should do so.

My biggest concern with the onset of paying players to play is the possible development of a system whereby schools have to get into a bidding war for the top recruits, like Free Agents in the NFL. And where certain starters get paid millions, while everyone else gets maybe a couple hundred dollars per game. This I think would be the worst case scenario. It would be very, very bad!

If we're going to pay these guys, let's do it right:
-- Flat pay rate across the board.
-- All schools pay the same amount.
-- Money cannot be used as a recruiting enticement, only for on-field performance.
-- All players get the same amount.
-- Injured players get paid regardless.
-- And establish a tiered pay-for-play system whereby smaller schools that get a much smaller slice of the television pie aren't financially devastated, and have to give up football and basketball because they can't afford to.
dosch44 wrote: That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------


Greg "Bullet-Train" Bryant
B*tch he'll run right through you!

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 2:37 AM

Re: Jim Delaney 


It was very magnanimous of JD to make a vague fluffy statement supporting the athletes that he exploited for millions.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 11:15 AM

Re: Jim Delaney 





dosch44 wrote: 
That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


   

Junior DE Shilique Calhoun &
Sophomore OLB James Onwualu

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 11:36 AM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Haha you have to hit me with a better meme than that. One that's trolling me harder after I set myself up like that.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:




dosch44 wrote: 
That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------

Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/22/2014 7:30 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Just not that black and white...for instance; where else can a kid coming out of high school get paid $$200-250k in his first job with limited experience? Not all schools are in the same financial circumstance. How do NCAA stars get paid compared to non-stars much less 3rd team players? If kids are now professionals how do the current NCAA rules regarding benefits affect them?

These are just a few questions that need to be addressed.

Presuming that collective voice stops once insurance is in place is laughable.


---------------------------------------------
--- dosch44 wrote:

That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 8:50 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Where else do 99% of the students fail to become professionals in their field?  I bet premeds have a better chance obecoming doctors.
jpltrojan wrote: Just not that black and white...for instance; where else can a kid coming out of high school get paid $$200-250k in his first job with limited experience? Not all schools are in the same financial circumstance. How do NCAA stars get paid compared to non-stars much less 3rd team players? If kids are now professionals how do the current NCAA rules regarding benefits affect them?

These are just a few questions that need to be addressed.

Presuming that collective voice stops once insurance is in place is laughable.


---------------------------------------------
--- dosch44 wrote:

That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/22/2014 11:35 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Good to see you still want to be wrong.


---------------------------------------------
--- jpltrojan wrote:

Just not that black and white...for instance; where else can a kid coming out of high school get paid $$200-250k in his first job with limited experience? Not all schools are in the same financial circumstance. How do NCAA stars get paid compared to non-stars much less 3rd team players? If kids are now professionals how do the current NCAA rules regarding benefits affect them?

These are just a few questions that need to be addressed.

Presuming that collective voice stops once insurance is in place is laughable.


---------------------------------------------
--- dosch44 wrote:

That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/23/2014 12:59 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 



dosch44 wrote: Good to see you still want to be wrong.


---------------------------------------------
--- jpltrojan wrote:

Just not that black and white...for instance; where else can a kid coming out of high school get paid $$200-250k in his first job with limited experience? Not all schools are in the same financial circumstance. How do NCAA stars get paid compared to non-stars much less 3rd team players? If kids are now professionals how do the current NCAA rules regarding benefits affect them?

These are just a few questions that need to be addressed.

Presuming that collective voice stops once insurance is in place is laughable.


---------------------------------------------
--- dosch44 wrote:

That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
I'll be one of the last persons to limit anybody's opportunity to make money no matter what the circumstances. So, let them make as much as they can and let the schools charge as much as they can. Let the students and student athletes get what they can. Let the schools get what they can. Let the athletes pay for their own insurance. If they can't afford the insurance...they don't play.

Get rid of all the false limitations like Prop 9 and let the schools reject whomever they wish. Get rid of ALL academic requirements including any race-related quotas.

Let the boosters pay as much as they want to the kids and let them operate on contracts. Let agents sign them whenever they want to sign them. Let the kids go to the pros whenever they want.

Open it up.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/23/2014 2:39 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


I think this topic, like most serious topics, is very hard to discuss in black and white terms.  I would summarize the two main disputing opinions (that voluntarily classify themselves in simple, polar terms) as:

1. College sports is a multi billion dollar industry where everyone makes money expect the players--so they should be paid.

2. College players do receive compensation on the order of 6 figures in the form of grant-in-aid scholarships--therefore they shouldn't be paid anything more for their services.  

I think neither position stands on its own without getting much deeper into the weeds and considering many different viewpoints or specifics.  Such as:

(Regarding opinion #1)
--It is a small minority of schools making a profit off of their athletic department.  Most athletic departments lose money and have to be supported out of their general funds.  

--Even in the schools that make money, it is only mens football and basketball that are profitable.  With rare exceptions, all other sports lose money.  

--At the schools with big programs, the implication is that the students don't get the benefit of the money that is coming into the school.  I don't think this is true--big time programs spend the most on their athletic facilities, practice fields, equipment, training facilities, training staffs, training tables, tutors, and coaches.  This stuff isn't free and is a big reason some schools athletics department budgets are twice what others are.  

--I believe it is an advantage to a student to play for the best coaches, receive the best medical care, and train in the best facilities that money can buy.  So there is benefit for playing for a big time program even if the student is not putting cash into their wallet. 

--$200,000+ value in scholarships should be considered compensation.  To not consider it such is an insult to every college student that comes out of school in massive debt, even after they did work study and swilled dishes in the dining hall for four years.  

--there are those that de-value the scholarship due to the state of higher education for athletes, and the fact that many don't graduate.  Let's be clear, what is given to students that is of value is the OPPORTUNITY to get a world class education, not a guarantee.  Much like our society that is based on equal opportunity, not equal outcomes.  

--there is considerable pressure to minimize academics at big time programs, and students that may want the opportunity to seek a world class education may not have the same opportunity that someone on an academic scholarship would have.  

(Regarding opinion #2):
--Many athletes do not come from money, and just because they are getting grant-in-aid for their tuition and board, there are other basic costs that are not covered and are a struggle for student athlete's families.  

--college athletics is one of the only situations in our country where an 18-21 year old is suppressed from making the money that he/she could otherwise make of their name or likeness...all in the name of competitive balance.

--Someone in school on a music scholarship has no such restriction on performing and earning money.  Nor does an author or a computer programmer on an academic scholarship.  

--With the NCAA being in the business of suppressing any and all payments to student athletes in the name of unfair competitive advantages, they have unintentionally created an underworld booster economy whereby funds have to be secretly funneled to prize recruits.  Furthermore, the NCAA has neither the power nor capability to regulate such illegal payments. 

--Many student athletes are flat prohibited from getting other gainful employment while on scholarship--so the school in essence is restricting ALL ability of a student athlete to make money.  where else in our society would this sort of monopolization and restriction of an adult's earning potential be tolerated? 


With all this said, I really can't envision this issue being accurately quantified in simple black and white terms.  I think those that attempt to do this are a disservice to the conversation, not unlike politicians that cling to black and white ideologies without getting into the weeds and discussing the practical issues that face one opinion or the other.  It does not move the conversation forward.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/23/2014 3:48 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


You don't know sh!t
dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.
 
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/23/2014 8:41 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 



jpltrojan wrote:
dosch44 wrote: Good to see you still want to be wrong.


---------------------------------------------
--- jpltrojan wrote:

Just not that black and white...for instance; where else can a kid coming out of high school get paid $$200-250k in his first job with limited experience? Not all schools are in the same financial circumstance. How do NCAA stars get paid compared to non-stars much less 3rd team players? If kids are now professionals how do the current NCAA rules regarding benefits affect them?

These are just a few questions that need to be addressed.

Presuming that collective voice stops once insurance is in place is laughable.


---------------------------------------------
--- dosch44 wrote:

That the NCAA is not a cartel, no player should ever receive any monetary compensation for the billions they help generate, the student athletes are completely expendable and aren't essential to college football, and the players shouldn't have a collective voice because it's better if the universities have 100% of the leverage.

That is what everybody on this board thinks other than me .... And sub.


---------------------------------------------
--- lumbergh wrote:

What was the question?

dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------
I'll be one of the last persons to limit anybody's opportunity to make money no matter what the circumstances. So, let them make as much as they can and let the schools charge as much as they can. Let the students and student athletes get what they can. Let the schools get what they can. Let the athletes pay for their own insurance. If they can't afford the insurance...they don't play.

Get rid of all the false limitations like Prop 9 and let the schools reject whomever they wish. Get rid of ALL academic requirements including any race-related quotas.

Let the boosters pay as much as they want to the kids and let them operate on contracts. Let agents sign them whenever they want to sign them. Let the kids go to the pros whenever they want.

Open it up.
If the NCAA is smart they'd go after the NBA and NFL and make it difficult for them to look at talent.  Kill the Pro Days...  Don't dismiss players so they can attend the draft.

Ask the NFL and NBA to follow the MLB draft rules.  Draft HS kids, juco's and Juniors.  

Then with the kids who decide to play College Football pay them a small sum lets say $1000 after taxes per month.  Allow them enter into licensing agreements on their own or with the University.  Also the University can sell player jerseys, photos, and autographs and the players get a cut.

As for games maybe each player gets $250.00 per game and the Players of the game get a $500.00 bonus.

Its pointless to prevent these kids from making money and limiting their earning potential.

Seriously is it fair that Manziel or Winston can't make a buck off their name

Last edited 6/23/2014 8:54 PM by SubFANtheTroll

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/23/2014 9:10 PM

Re: Jim Delaney 


Let's be honest, I've never been wrong once in my life.


---------------------------------------------
--- IrishfromA2 wrote:

You don't know sh!t
dosch44 wrote: Most importantly, every single person on this board will be wrong except me.


---------------------------------------------

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >