Jay Bilas crying

[fisherscatfan_rivals101526]

I’m fine cancelling sports that don’t make money. Why should they get handouts? Pay the players who generate revenue.

Whoaaa! Better watch out because how can you have Jimmie the lacrosse players or Susie the gymnastthenot get their fair outcome.

As for Rupp, the city of Lexington "took the risk"...or more so, the taxpayers of Lexington and those who bought the bonds that were used to build it. Their return was fixed, not dependent upon performance of the team.

Every university doesn't have the same facilities because they don't all have the same resources or priorities. The Ivy League schools have orders of magnitude more money than UK but they don't have the demand nor desire to use those resources in that manner.

Taking risks means that if the program starts losing money that creditors are going to come after the assets of the coaches and administrators. They might lose their jobs but they aren't risking anything any more than any employee risks at their job. Nobody in college athletics is taking on personal debt or taking personal risk.

Dude, a very small handful of universities make ANYTHING off of athletics. Three fourths of UK student athletes play non-revenue sports. If it was about protecting investments then why have them? Zero high schools make money from sports, why have them?

Also when it comes to resources, there are a 100 schools out there with more resources, deeper pockets than UK.

Admit what scares you is that Joe Blow University has a billionaire alum that decides he wants to put together the greatest team ever and goes out and offers the best coach and best players more than they will ever make in the NBA to come to his "cracker box" and play.

What scares me is people like you vote. Learn to read and comprehend. You are pissed that coaches make money. I never said a coach takes a risk. I wrote the University takes the risk.

The reason high schools and universities had sports was much more about providing a well rounded experience. High Schools still do that just like having art class.

Your own words are very few universities make money yet you advocate the universities paying them or letting boosters pay them. Hell even the pro leagues don’t let just anyone pay the players. There is a structure. If those boosters could make money at it, they would yet nobody is rolling out that league. My comments have nothing about whether UK/boosters would pay up or not. If the people don’t like the system they have options yet do nothing but ***** about their treatment.

Look up St. Joseph’s if you dont think universities can go under.

Regardless I am done discussing with you. You will not change my mind nor will I change yours.

 

[Kizzy]

It's not that simple, nor accurate. Don't drink the poison if you love the game. The end goal is to tear the system down and rebuilt it under a professional model. Don't give them an inch or they will take the mile. This is the only goal, they just mislead people into taking the plunge.

I love your posts bro I just have no clue what you're saying here. But I really don't think of it TBH. And in true honesty, I can see if I was a player for UK say, and my Jersey was top selling Jersey in country Netting our Program, NCAA, whoever it goes to millions upon millions in money and then I'm say responsible for Winning us a title, I'm not sure of the facts here because I played football and I understand how monies are distributed in football but in Basketball I'm unsure but anyway, say I win A title like Glenn Robinson style where I was thee guy that put the team on my back. I'd say on top of jersey sells I also just made UK millions from post season play and winning a title. Then I'm the reason for ALL the sell out crowds(just pretend lol) that's millions on top of that....I play pick up ball a couple days after we won it All, I'm a shoo in as the number 1 pick but in that pick up game, I snap my leg in two Kenyon Martin style.

My Basketball career is over before I could even get a dime as a number 1 draft pick pro I'm never gonna be able to play ever again or reap the fruits of my hard work, blood, sweat, and tears that I put in at UK. I'm now in poverty. I can't get a job at this time.

But I made the NCAA, and UK Richer than rich! And I get nothing but a thanks as I suffer the rest of my days. This is an un likely extreme scenario but could happen. All I'm saying is, I would certainly feel i deserve something other than a $60K education and a thank you. I generated MILLIONS. in return they offered me a $60K education and a thank you. . It's a rip off.

Edit: I just looked so I'm from Kentucky and my scholarship is worth a lil over $10K a year. So it's more or less not a 60K education especially if I leave as a freshman. It's Now about only $10,200 spent on me.

I fully recognize this is silly and extreme but the part about kids generating millions and don't see 1 cent for their services is true. And an Education trade off is pocket change to offer up as a reward. But I digress I just wish the corrupt NCAA didn't get all that money. I'm not a OAD NBA lover. I just think its a Dang shame sometimes how much some of these kids get used for money and get a thanks for playing in return.

 

[JLK83]

I generated MILLIONS.

The players wouldn't generate any money if it weren't for the NCAA providing the infrastructure.

 

[Kizzy]

The players wouldn't generate any money if it weren't for the NCAA providing the infrastructure.

OK let's look at it from another truth, the NCAA would be broke if it had no players.

 

[morgousky]

Whoaaa! Better watch out because how can you have Jimmie the lacrosse players or Susie the gymnastthenot get their fair outcome.


What scares me is people like you vote. Learn to read and comprehend. You are pissed that coaches make money. I never said a coach takes a risk. I wrote the University takes the risk.

The reason high schools and universities had sports was much more about providing a well rounded experience. High Schools still do that just like having art class.

Your own words are very few universities make money yet you advocate the universities paying them or letting boosters pay them. Hell even the pro leagues don’t let just anyone pay the players. There is a structure. If those boosters could make money at it, they would yet nobody is rolling out that league. My comments have nothing about whether UK/boosters would pay up or not. If the people don’t like the system they have options yet do nothing but ***** about their treatment.

Look up St. Joseph’s if you dont think universities can go under.

Regardless I am done discussing with you. You will not change my mind nor will I change yours.

I cant see how more aren't terrified listening to these people's positions on this.

 

[JLK83]

OK let's look at it from another truth, the NCAA would be broke if it had no players.

That's never going to happen, the debate only extends to the ~25 players per class that might make a living playing basketball some day.

 

[Kizzy]

I honestly don't care at the end of the day but I just put myself in a kids shoes that gets used, their likeness, their jersey, you name it and I'd be like the fab five was, they walked in stores and watched as their jerseys sold like hotcakes but they was broke as a joke. IMHO that's too much.

But at end of the day, I don't care enough to debate this to the point where I'm out of my element with guys like you who really follow this stuff, and know way more than me about it. I just talking for food for thought.

 

[morgousky]

OK let's look at it from another truth, the NCAA would be broke if it had no players.

I see the quote above so I'll try and tackle it here.

If you hurt yourself before you are selected number one, in a pickup game of all things, you're an idiot and natural selection just had it's way. I'd be hiding in a closet like Howie afraid of everything including the sun until the draft was over. Not sure the NCAA is responsible for that.

The NCAA is not what you think they are. That's the problem, there's so much misinformation out there that it's tough for anyone to distinguish fact from fiction. The majority of what the NCAA "makes" goes back to the universities, for example. But it's usually skipped over.

Another thing that gets easily forgotten in all of this, the NBA rule is the real problem. Forget the NCAA for a second, look at the NBA. Why aren't they allowing these kids to go straight in? Why aren't people calling for a boycott of the G league over salary demands? ESPN did it with the NCAA, who offers more to these kids than the G league does.

I say let them go earn their money today. Go overseas, go to the G league, or sit it out and train / sign endorsements. You think Lebron Needed college basketball to sign with Nike? Durant?

Not one of these players is forced to play. That's the death nail in the whole theory.

If they want to play in college basketball, you play for an education, free room and board, free meals, free marketing, free tutors, free development by the best coaches in the world, and free exposure. It's a value more than 60,000 I can tell you.

I am in support of re-evaluating the NCAA and their procedures. I also think some of them make too much money and their "perks" need to go away.

I don't think most people would enjoy a professionalized game if it were to actually happen.

 

[morgousky]

I honestly don't care at the end of the day but I just put myself in a kids shoes that gets used, their likeness, their jersey, you name it and I'd be like the fab five was, they walked in stores and watched as their jerseys sold like hotcakes but they was broke as a joke. IMHO that's too much.

But at end of the day, I don't care enough to debate this to the point where I'm out of my element with guys like you who really follow this stuff, and know way more than me about it. I just talking for food for thought.

You're Ok man sounds like you follow it just fine. We all see things differently.

 

[KyFaninNC]

I love your posts bro I just have no clue what you're saying here. But I really don't think of it TBH. And in true honesty, I can see if I was a player for UK say, and my Jersey was top selling Jersey in country Netting our Program, NCAA, whoever it goes to millions upon millions in money and then I'm say responsible for Winning us a title, I'm not sure of the facts here because I played football and I understand how monies are distributed in football but in Basketball I'm unsure but anyway, say I win A title like Glenn Robinson style where I was thee guy that put the team on my back. I'd say on top of jersey sells I also just made UK millions from post season play and winning a title. Then I'm the reason for ALL the sell out crowds(just pretend lol) that's millions on top of that....I play pick up ball a couple days after we won it All, I'm a shoo in as the number 1 pick but in that pick up game, I snap my leg in two Kenyon Martin style.

My Basketball career is over before I could even get a dime as a number 1 draft pick pro I'm never gonna be able to play ever again or reap the fruits of my hard work, blood, sweat, and tears that I put in at UK. I'm now in poverty. I can't get a job at this time.

But I made the NCAA, and UK Richer than rich! And I get nothing but a thanks as I suffer the rest of my days. This is an un likely extreme scenario but could happen. All I'm saying is, I would certainly feel i deserve something other than a $60K education and a thank you. I generated MILLIONS. in return they offered me a $60K education and a thank you. . It's a rip off.

Edit: I just looked so I'm from Kentucky and my scholarship is worth a lil over $10K a year. So it's more or less not a 60K education especially if I leave as a freshman. It's Now about only $10,200 spent on me.

I fully recognize this is silly and extreme but the part about kids generating millions and don't see 1 cent for their services is true. And an Education trade off is pocket change to offer up as a reward. But I digress I just wish the corrupt NCAA didn't get all that money. I'm not a OAD NBA lover. I just think its a Dang shame sometimes how much some of these kids get used for money and get a thanks for playing in return.

Take the name off the jersey, only have the name of the school on it.

 

[KyFaninNC]

Edit: I just looked so I'm from Kentucky and my scholarship is worth a lil over $10K a year.

Tuition at Duke is 50K a year, If a player stays for 4 years and gets a degree, that is worth 200K, not too shaby. I am sure some other schools are similar or even higher. I live here, so I happen to know this.

 

[fuzz77]

Whoaaa! Better watch out because how can you have Jimmie the lacrosse players or Susie the gymnastthenot get their fair outcome.


What scares me is people like you vote. Learn to read and comprehend. You are pissed that coaches make money. I never said a coach takes a risk. I wrote the University takes the risk.

The reason high schools and universities had sports was much more about providing a well rounded experience. High Schools still do that just like having art class.

Your own words are very few universities make money yet you advocate the universities paying them or letting boosters pay them. Hell even the pro leagues don’t let just anyone pay the players. There is a structure. If those boosters could make money at it, they would yet nobody is rolling out that league. My comments have nothing about whether UK/boosters would pay up or not. If the people don’t like the system they have options yet do nothing but ***** about their treatment.

Look up St. Joseph’s if you dont think universities can go under.

Regardless I am done discussing with you. You will not change my mind nor will I change yours.

I'm pissed that coaches make money? News to me.
Universities are institutions run by people. Only people can take risks and it's only a risk if there is something personal for them to lose. Regardless of what UK does as an institution the most that Eli Capiluto, Mitch Barnhart, the members of the Board of Trust have to lose is their jobs and future income. If any of those people leave or retire they aren't on the hook in case of failure.

Please try to keep up...
A) I never advocated that universities pay athletes. I've advocated allowing those athletes to own their own images just like every other student on campus. If someone in the band wants to go Fayette Mall, set up a table and sell autographs...they can. If one of the car dealerships wants to hire a student, perhaps a cheerleader or dance team member to do ads for their dealership...they can. Any student at UK can get paid to do those things except the athletes. Cheerleaders are on full scholarship. Hell, my niece was a cheerleader at UK and did modeling with several of her photos being used in catalogs that sold cheer/dance uniforms to schools and was paid for those ads. Why was it ok for her but not the athletes?

You familiar with Jeremy Bloom?
Played football at Colorado (Freshman All-American) and was a world class skier on the US Olympic team. The NCAA banned him after his sophomore year because he was making money from skiing. Two days after the 2006 Olympics he went to the NFL combine, was a 5th round selection by the Eagles.

B) Pro athletes can take money from anyone. Teams are limited as to how much they can pay but Lebron can get paid by as many people who are willing to pay him. Sign as many endorsement deals as people will give him.

C) How does allowing boosters pay athletes help or hurt the school? And how does the economic feasibility of an alternative league have any meaning in this discussion? There are people that have enough money that they are willing to spend it for the thrill of seeing their team win. They aren't making money from giving players $100 handshakes, they are buying their perceived happiness.

D) Certainly schools can go under yet nobody has ever held a gun to a school's head and made it spend even 1 cent on athletics. Schools, or more distinctly, school administrators decide how much they will spend and even, if they will spend on athletics. But don't go signing coaches to $5M contracts and then claim poverty. It's like someone buying a $5million home and then crying about trying to pay the mortgage.

 

[fuzz77]

Tuition at Duke is 50K a year, If a player stays for 4 years and gets a degree, that is worth 200K, not too shaby. I am sure some other schools are similar or even higher. I live here, so I happen to know this.

So your rational is that $200K should be enough...right?

If someone is willing to give you an extra $100K on top of what you earn, should you be able to take it?
Why shouldn't Cal coach for just $1M...isn't that enough?

Why should anyone be able to dictate the amount of compensation allowable to anyone else?

 

[fuzz77]

That's never going to happen, the debate only extends to the ~25 players per class that might make a living playing basketball some day.

Actually that magnifies the injustice. Why should the players for whom this is their last chance to earn from their playing, not be able to profit? How many of "The unforgettables" were able to make money off basketball after they left UK? (other than coaching?) How many jerseys could each have sold? How many autographs could they have sold?

 

[morgousky]

I'm pissed that coaches make money? News to me.
Universities are institutions run by people. Only people can take risks and it's only a risk if there is something personal for them to lose. Regardless of what UK does as an institution the most that Eli Capiluto, Mitch Barnhart, the members of the Board of Trust have to lose is their jobs and future income. If any of those people leave or retire they aren't on the hook in case of failure.

Please try to keep up...
A) I never advocated that universities pay athletes. I've advocated allowing those athletes to own their own images just like every other student on campus. If someone in the band wants to go Fayette Mall, set up a table and sell autographs...they can. If one of the car dealerships wants to hire a student, perhaps a cheerleader or dance team member to do ads for their dealership...they can. Any student at UK can get paid to do those things except the athletes. Cheerleaders are on full scholarship. Hell, my niece was a cheerleader at UK and did modeling with several of her photos being used in catalogs that sold cheer/dance uniforms to schools and was paid for those ads. Why was it ok for her but not the athletes?

You familiar with Jeremy Bloom?
Played football at Colorado (Freshman All-American) and was a world class skier on the US Olympic team. The NCAA banned him after his sophomore year because he was making money from skiing. Two days after the 2006 Olympics he went to the NFL combine, was a 5th round selection by the Eagles.

B) Pro athletes can take money from anyone. Teams are limited as to how much they can pay but Lebron can get paid by as many people who are willing to pay him. Sign as many endorsement deals as people will give him.

C) How does allowing boosters pay athletes help or hurt the school? And how does the economic feasibility of an alternative league have any meaning in this discussion? There are people that have enough money that they are willing to spend it for the thrill of seeing their team win. They aren't making money from giving players $100 handshakes, they are buying their perceived happiness.

D) Certainly schools can go under yet nobody has ever held a gun to a school's head and made it spend even 1 cent on athletics. Schools, or more distinctly, school administrators decide how much they will spend and even, if they will spend on athletics. But don't go signing coaches to $5M contracts and then claim poverty. It's like someone buying a $5million home and then crying about trying to pay the mortgage.

You live on a slippery slope. Some of this crap would be extremely damaging to college basketball. Once the door is open, demands don't stop.

They do not ever have to step foot on a college basketball court. I know some of you will not accept this, but if it's so unfair, why are they coming?

I'm sure you're one to think that the development is better in the G league, they have more time to practice etc. So why go to college? Where is the boycott of the G league? You get less form the G league than you do from Universities? Where is the outrage?

Can you answer that? Because I can. The handlers believe there's more money to be had in college, because of the PROGRAMS and it's fans. This isn't about making the game better, it's about cash grabbing.

No thanks, go to the G league, go to Europe, or sit it out and train / sign endorsements. You can do everything you're talking about now, you don't need to go to college for it.

 

[K_TIME]

Everybody jumping on the "pay the players bandwagon" (which is fine with me) needs to get into the details to make this happen.

1. Does DeVincenzo get more $$$ since he was MVP over Paschal, Bridges, Brunson, Spellman? Or does even the lowest guy on bench get same $$$.
2. Does the basketball team get same money as football teams (which tend to rake in more $$$ generally).
3. Due to Title IX...do the women get same as men?
4. Similar to #3...do lower profile sports get less money...like Baseball, wrestling, golf, etc..

It's the easiest thing in the world to jump on this "pay them" mentality. But the hardest part is this will dwindle down to certain kids demand more than other kids (i.e. John Wall jerserys were a hotter item than Patrick Patterson jersey's 9 years ago)....so are we going to let John Wall get more $$$ or try to even it out? And if John Wall gets more money will that affect players on the team? (i.e. will a guy whose role is to play defense/rebound be less enamored with his role while John Wall takes all the shots). This is going to be a precarious position in figuring this all out.

 

[morgousky]

Everybody jumping on the "pay the players bandwagon" (which is fine with me) needs to get into the details to make this happen.

1. Does DeVincenzo get more $$$ since he was MVP over Paschal, Bridges, Brunson, Spellman? Or does even the lowest guy on bench get same $$$.
2. Does the basketball team get same money as football teams (which tend to rake in more $$$ generally).
3. Due to Title IX...do the women get same as men?
4. Similar to #3...do lower profile sports get less money...like Baseball, wrestling, golf, etc..

It's the easiest thing in the world to jump on this "pay them" mentality. But the hardest part is this will dwindle down to certain kids demand more than other kids (i.e. John Wall jerserys were a hotter item than Patrick Patterson jersey's 9 years ago)....so are we going to let John Wall get more $$$ or try to even it out? And if John Wall gets more money will that affect players on the team? (i.e. will a guy whose role is to play defense/rebound be less enamored with his role while John Wall takes all the shots). This is going to be a precarious position in figuring this all out.

Exactly. And you will get spotty details and half truths in the responses. All they know is they've been told the NCAA is bad and poor kids are being treated unfairly. Anytime someone goes to these extremes to prove a point, and pulls on the heart strings, you know they've got no substance.

 

[truebluewildcat_rivals34254]

So the logic is "Company XYZ makes a profit off something so all those who wear it should profit"

Jay started off his career as a logical and reasonable guy. He's now a complete pawn for his Micky Mouse masters...alright Disney, pay every athlete who's ever appeared on espn...

Cool. I got a closet full of Nike, UK, Old Navy, etc clothes that I wear and seen in public with...can't wait for my check from Phil Knight, the university, and GAP...

I drive a chevy to. No telling how many people have seen that logo as I've driven around...Pay up chevy...

For the love of god, the NCAA nor Nike or any corporate sponsor makes enough money to pay 460,000+ student athletes. Individual institutions do not make enough to pay all athletes beyond scholarships and cost of living stipends. Most athletic departments outside of the big dogs and P5 barely make enough money to pay the bills. For every UK, USC, UNC, Ohio State, there are about 10 EKUs who are looking into cutting programs because of money/budget issues.

If the big boys start to pay athletes, it will be at the expense of the non revenue sports. Other programs and facilities will start to deteriorate and cease to exist.

Every P5 program will cut checks to the best 80-90 football players they can get, and 4-5 years later ESPN will be doing an OTL on why womens golf, softball, basketball, volleyball, have gone way of the Dodo. Then about 5 years after that it will be men's soccer, golf, track and field, hell even baseball.

 

[fisherscatfan_rivals101526]

Everybody jumping on the "pay the players bandwagon" (which is fine with me) needs to get into the details to make this happen.

1. Does DeVincenzo get more $$$ since he was MVP over Paschal, Bridges, Brunson, Spellman? Or does even the lowest guy on bench get same $$$.
2. Does the basketball team get same money as football teams (which tend to rake in more $$$ generally).
3. Due to Title IX...do the women get same as men?
4. Similar to #3...do lower profile sports get less money...like Baseball, wrestling, golf, etc..

It's the easiest thing in the world to jump on this "pay them" mentality. But the hardest part is this will dwindle down to certain kids demand more than other kids (i.e. John Wall jerserys were a hotter item than Patrick Patterson jersey's 9 years ago)....so are we going to let John Wall get more $$$ or try to even it out? And if John Wall gets more money will that affect players on the team? (i.e. will a guy whose role is to play defense/rebound be less enamored with his role while John Wall takes all the shots). This is going to be a precarious position in figuring this all out.

Agreed, but the funny thing is I don’t even care about the details. What I cannot stand is people acting like these kids were forced to go to college. I m not in the business of defending the NCAA either. But the NCAA and the universities created a system/product and if you want to participate here are the rules.

I cannot stand people who know the rules going in and then ***** once in because they want more. There all alternatives already established. Don’t like this club, go join another. Not many takers on that because it is easier to ***** and moan. 95% of it is because at some point in their life they perceive some unfair treatment. Go make all your money you want and more power to you. Just quit being a whiny *** about the rules when you knew them going in.

The NCAA knows they have a good thing going and it is built on what they believe is the fans perception of everyone has a fair shot. Not saying that is accurate but it is what it is. If the powers that be thought more popularity would be gained by paying believe me they would.

 

[fuzz77]

You live on a slippery slope. Some of this crap would be extremely damaging to college basketball. Once the door is open, demands don't stop.

They do not ever have to step foot on a college basketball court. I know some of you will not accept this, but if it's so unfair, why are they coming?

I'm sure you're one to think that the development is better in the G league, they have more time to practice etc. So why go to college? Where is the boycott of the G league? You get less form the G league than you do from Universities? Where is the outrage?

Can you answer that? Because I can. The handlers believe there's more money to be had in college, because of the PROGRAMS and it's fans. This isn't about making the game better, it's about cash grabbing.

No thanks, go to the G league, go to Europe, or sit it out and train / sign endorsements. You can do everything you're talking about now, you don't need to go to college for it.

This has nothing to do with the G league, NBA or "the handlers"... 95% of college athletes will never earn a penny from athletics after they leave school yet you've established that X is the max they are allowed to receive.

Again, my niece who was a cheerleader at UK 95-99 was able to do modeling for cheer and dance uniforms while at UK on a full scholarship and be paid. Many of the cheerleaders also work as coaches, hold camps for school age kids and can make some pretty damn good money doing so.
The rifle team at UK just won the NC...if someone is willing to pay them for their autograph, why should they not be able to take it?

A lot of college athletes may be home town heroes that have an opportunity to cash in on their celebrity during their college career. Why would it be so bad to allow them to setup a table and sign autographs for $5 or $10 a piece if people are willing to pay for it? Can you answer that?

Saying "because they get more from college" is a weak, weak answer. When deciding between college and the G league or Europe they are only deciding which option of those available is the best. No other students except NCAA athletes are limited as to their earning potential while in school. Why should there be this exception?

You want the rules set because of the few that will be able to profit from their sports later in life...what about those who's earning potential ends when the end of their college careers?

Isn't that rather communist of you?

 

[fuzz77]

Everybody jumping on the "pay the players bandwagon" (which is fine with me) needs to get into the details to make this happen.

1. Does DeVincenzo get more $$$ since he was MVP over Paschal, Bridges, Brunson, Spellman? Or does even the lowest guy on bench get same $$$.
2. Does the basketball team get same money as football teams (which tend to rake in more $$$ generally).
3. Due to Title IX...do the women get same as men?
4. Similar to #3...do lower profile sports get less money...like Baseball, wrestling, golf, etc..

It's the easiest thing in the world to jump on this "pay them" mentality. But the hardest part is this will dwindle down to certain kids demand more than other kids (i.e. John Wall jerserys were a hotter item than Patrick Patterson jersey's 9 years ago)....so are we going to let John Wall get more $$$ or try to even it out? And if John Wall gets more money will that affect players on the team? (i.e. will a guy whose role is to play defense/rebound be less enamored with his role while John Wall takes all the shots). This is going to be a precarious position in figuring this all out.

Quit dancing around the issue.

Your issue with players owning their own images is what? Not paid by the school but from whoever is willing to pay them for things like autographs, appearances, camps/coaching, etc?
The same opportunities available to every other student on campus.

That answers all 4 of your questions. The market decides who gets what.

 

[fuzz77]

So the logic is "Company XYZ makes a profit off something so all those who wear it should profit"

Jay started off his career as a logical and reasonable guy. He's now a complete pawn for his Micky Mouse masters...alright Disney, pay every athlete who's ever appeared on espn...

Cool. I got a closet full of Nike, UK, Old Navy, etc clothes that I wear and seen in public with...can't wait for my check from Phil Knight, the university, and GAP...

I drive a chevy to. No telling how many people have seen that logo as I've driven around...Pay up chevy...

For the love of god, the NCAA nor Nike or any corporate sponsor makes enough money to pay 460,000+ student athletes. Individual institutions do not make enough to pay all athletes beyond scholarships and cost of living stipends. Most athletic departments outside of the big dogs and P5 barely make enough money to pay the bills. For every UK, USC, UNC, Ohio State, there are about 10 EKUs who are looking into cutting programs because of money/budget issues.

If the big boys start to pay athletes, it will be at the expense of the non revenue sports. Other programs and facilities will start to deteriorate and cease to exist.

Every P5 program will cut checks to the best 80-90 football players they can get, and 4-5 years later ESPN will be doing an OTL on why womens golf, softball, basketball, volleyball, have gone way of the Dodo. Then about 5 years after that it will be men's soccer, golf, track and field, hell even baseball.

Pretty dumb takes that miss everything.

You drive a Chevy. Ok, you cannot demand that someone pay you but if someone is willing to pay you, why should you not be able to accept that payment? You do realize that there are people that get paid to drive certain cars.

You wear a Nike shirt...perhaps that shirt has the logo of another business on it and they want you to be seen wearing it and are willing to provide you that shirt in every conceivable color to wear it...why should you not be able to accept? Again, something that business do every day.

Why is it ok for a band member, a cheerleader or dance team member to earn money using their craft while in school but not the athlete?

I'll wait for an answer.

 

[K_TIME]

Quit dancing around the issue.

Your issue with players owning their own images is what? Not paid by the school but from whoever is willing to pay them for things like autographs, appearances, camps/coaching, etc?
The same opportunities available to every other student on campus.

That answers all 4 of your questions. The market decides who gets what.

OK...but we need to separate issues.

1. Many (including Bilas) are talking of NCAA/schools making $$$ off of selling merchandise, tickets, TV deals, etc...so that issue is all about NCAA giving a piece of the money made directly to athletes.
2. Second issue is allowing entities that aren't associated with NCAA to give kids money for their likeness, autographs, etc.. I'm fine with NCAA removing rules that take that financial opportunity away from kids and allow it to be done openly. But a potential downside is we're going to have boosters get very involved in this by way of paying kids tens of thousands of dollars to attend UK, Kansas, UNC, Alabama/Auburn Football, etc.. and term it in a way that the kid was getting paid to promote Car sales for a booster, autographs, etc.. and will be a way to legalize cheating.

Again, I'm fine for the kids getting the money they can get out of a university/booster...but the downside is it will open the floodgates to schools paying players to come to their schools.

 

[FrankUnderwood]

I love your posts bro I just have no clue what you're saying here. But I really don't think of it TBH. And in true honesty, I can see if I was a player for UK say, and my Jersey was top selling Jersey in country Netting our Program, NCAA, whoever it goes to millions upon millions in money and then I'm say responsible for Winning us a title, I'm not sure of the facts here because I played football and I understand how monies are distributed in football but in Basketball I'm unsure but anyway, say I win A title like Glenn Robinson style where I was thee guy that put the team on my back. I'd say on top of jersey sells I also just made UK millions from post season play and winning a title. Then I'm the reason for ALL the sell out crowds(just pretend lol) that's millions on top of that....I play pick up ball a couple days after we won it All, I'm a shoo in as the number 1 pick but in that pick up game, I snap my leg in two Kenyon Martin style.

My Basketball career is over before I could even get a dime as a number 1 draft pick pro I'm never gonna be able to play ever again or reap the fruits of my hard work, blood, sweat, and tears that I put in at UK. I'm now in poverty. I can't get a job at this time.

But I made the NCAA, and UK Richer than rich! And I get nothing but a thanks as I suffer the rest of my days. This is an un likely extreme scenario but could happen. All I'm saying is, I would certainly feel i deserve something other than a $60K education and a thank you. I generated MILLIONS. in return they offered me a $60K education and a thank you. . It's a rip off.

Edit: I just looked so I'm from Kentucky and my scholarship is worth a lil over $10K a year. So it's more or less not a 60K education especially if I leave as a freshman. It's Now about only $10,200 spent on me.

I fully recognize this is silly and extreme but the part about kids generating millions and don't see 1 cent for their services is true. And an Education trade off is pocket change to offer up as a reward. But I digress I just wish the corrupt NCAA didn't get all that money. I'm not a OAD NBA lover. I just think its a Dang shame sometimes how much some of these kids get used for money and get a thanks for playing in return.

How often does that happen?

I could also be struck by lightning tomorrow ...

 

[fuzz77]

OK...but we need to separate issues.

1. Many (including Bilas) are talking of NCAA/schools making $$$ off of selling merchandise, tickets, TV deals, etc...so that issue is all about NCAA giving a piece of the money made directly to athletes.
2. Second issue is allowing entities that aren't associated with NCAA to give kids money for their likeness, autographs, etc.. I'm fine with NCAA removing rules that take that financial opportunity away from kids and allow it to be done openly. But a potential downside is we're going to have boosters get very involved in this by way of paying kids tens of thousands of dollars to attend UK, Kansas, UNC, Alabama/Auburn Football, etc.. and term it in a way that the kid was getting paid to promote Car sales for a booster, autographs, etc.. and will be a way to legalize cheating.

Again, I'm fine for the kids getting the money they can get out of a university/booster...but the downside is it will open the floodgates to schools paying players to come to their schools.

I don't accept your #1 above. Bilas has pointed out that the schools and NCAA profit from the system but they don't allow the players to do so. You and others insinuate that means that he is insisting that the schools pay the player...he has just advocated that the players be allowed to profit as well. He hasn't specified how that would happen.

Regardless, most every P5 school is paying HCs for football and basketball $1M+ each which tells me that part of that pool of money could be redirected to the athletes. I might stipulate that the "player pool" be equal to the combined salaries of the FB & BB coaches and distributed equally among all scholarship athletes. Athletes that receive partial scholarships would receive a share equal to their scholarship. .5 scholarship = .5 share.

 

[RebelCat6]

Jay Bilas is SO right about this one thing. He's not saying for the schools to play for play, he's saying a player should be able to profit from his likeness via sponsorship or other means. I agree 100% with Jay !!

 

[truebluewildcat_rivals34254]

Pretty dumb takes that miss everything.

You drive a Chevy. Ok, you cannot demand that someone pay you but if someone is willing to pay you, why should you not be able to accept that payment? You do realize that there are people that get paid to drive certain cars.

You wear a Nike shirt...perhaps that shirt has the logo of another business on it and they want you to be seen wearing it and are willing to provide you that shirt in every conceivable color to wear it...why should you not be able to accept? Again, something that business do every day.

Why is it ok for a band member, a cheerleader or dance team member to earn money using their craft while in school but not the athlete?

I'll wait for an answer.

Who has stepped up and said "Don't worry NCAA we are willing to pay athletes that wear our logos or play on our networks?"

If somebody has, great. I'm not against athletes getting paid, I'm against the illogical idea the NCAA and/or individual institutions have enough money to pay everyone.

I'm also against people volunteering other people to pay and take pay cuts..."Oh the NCAA and member institutions should pay...coaches and athletic administrators should take pay cuts so athletes get paid...etc..."

The discussion needs to progress past NCAA and individual programs paying up. They clearly are not going to. Now, should somebody propose other organizations spending their own money to pay athletes, fine, maybe the NCAA would be willing to listen and could be pressured into allowing athletes to get paid by third parties.

As far as dance and cheer. If the NCAA and athletics programs are paying them beyond scholarships and cost of living, then we do indeed have a problem. If other people and businesses are paying them to shake their little tail feathers, then there is no issue.

Perhaps all the apparel companies and other sponsors of major college sports could get together and work out exactly how much they would like to pay athletes. Not only big time basketball and football stars, but the tennis player and softball players as well.

 

[fuzz77]

Who has stepped up and said "Don't worry NCAA we are willing to pay athletes that wear our logos or play on our networks?"

If somebody has, great. I'm not against athletes getting paid, I'm against the illogical idea the NCAA and/or individual institutions have enough money to pay everyone.

I'm also against people volunteering other people to pay and take pay cuts..."Oh the NCAA and member institutions should pay...coaches and athletic administrators should take pay cuts so athletes get paid...etc..."

The discussion needs to progress past NCAA and individual programs paying up. They clearly are not going to. Now, should somebody propose other organizations spending their own money to pay athletes, fine, maybe the NCAA would be willing to listen and could be pressured into allowing athletes to get paid by third parties.

As far as dance and cheer. If the NCAA and athletics programs are paying them beyond scholarships and cost of living, then we do indeed have a problem. If other people and businesses are paying them to shake their little tail feathers, then there is no issue.

Perhaps all the apparel companies and other sponsors of major college sports could get together and work out exactly how much they would like to pay athletes. Not only big time basketball and football stars, but the tennis player and softball players as well.

We seem to agree on the biggest point that the athletes should be able to profit from their image and skills if someone is willing to pay. I'll take that as a win.

My point about dance and cheer is that other people and businesses can pay them. Band members can play gigs and be paid as well. Athletes don't enjoy those same privileges.

As for spending other peoples monies...the flood of money into college sports programs is a pretty new phenomenon. In 2005 UKs athletics budget was $52.4M. By 2013 it had doubled to $104M and this year it is up to $140M. Everybody sitting at the table got to eat...coaches and administrators...they changed the rules to allow teams to hire more coaches and "quality control" positions...they looked for ways to spend money and raised outrageous salaries even higher. The simply profited from being at the right place at the right time. To come back to these people who have profited so insanely and suggest that they share the spoils...I see no problem with doing so.

 

[truebluewildcat_rivals34254]

We seem to agree on the biggest point that the athletes should be able to profit from their image and skills if someone is willing to pay. I'll take that as a win.

My point about dance and cheer is that other people and businesses can pay them. Band members can play gigs and be paid as well. Athletes don't enjoy those same privileges.

As for spending other peoples monies...the flood of money into college sports programs is a pretty new phenomenon. In 2005 UKs athletics budget was $52.4M. By 2013 it had doubled to $104M and this year it is up to $140M. Everybody sitting at the table got to eat...coaches and administrators...they changed the rules to allow teams to hire more coaches and "quality control" positions...they looked for ways to spend money and raised outrageous salaries even higher. The simply profited from being at the right place at the right time. To come back to these people who have profited so insanely and suggest that they share the spoils...I see no problem with doing so.

In a perfect world, that is plausible. People sharing. Coaches, admins, strength coaches, and NCAA officials all coming together in a kumbaya moment and deciding they will all take less and share with athletes. I wouldn't oppose it if they did.

I think in this world as it is currently constructed, if minds ever came together and decided to pay the athletes, the issue of who gets how much would still remain and whether or not most athletic departments could afford to pay non revenue athletes would be a huge issue.

I think one issue that perhaps doesn't get discussed is whether or not Athletic Departments would pay for all the perks in a world/system in which athletes get paid fairly. At what point would programs say "alright we're paying you fairly so we're not going to pay for a chef, chiropractor, massage therapist, nutritionist, high performance exercise specialist etc...ya'll can do all that on your own dime" ?

Could colleges contractually obligate basketball players to stay longer than a year, or in the case of football players all 4-5 (if you count RS) years?

Could they require a top draft projection to play in a bowl game?

For me the issue is not as simple as just paying players. It's the entire pandora's box that is professional work for pay relationships.