#Not NCAA property

[TankedCat]

This. If they want a shoe deal they can have a shoe deal. Make a rule that allows players to wear any brand regardless of what the university is sponsored by to try to take the Adidas/Nike influence out. The brand that sponsors the University is only on the jersey and what not. If they want an agent they can have that. etc etc.

But they are already getting a free tuition, room, food, and at places like UK they have team chefs and barbers and world class athletics trainers and physical therapist etc. They are taken care of just fine. If the tuition doesn't mean anything bc they have zero care about education then go play overseas or in the GLeague for a year.

At the end of the day it is COLLEGE athletics so that free tuition is a legitimate payment. It is there decision if they leave early bc a better opportunity presents itself financially, however if they stay that is 100k+ they saved while getting a degree.

also, their earning potential is enhanced by the school they choose.

since they are being paid for their earning potential off the court, what is player X going to earn if they just play street ball? what will they earn if they play at Morehead , what will they earn if they play at Kentucky?

so the idea of their value is very much dependent on the choices they make. Putting on the Kentucky , Duke, UNC, , whatever uniform provides them exposure. The college is making an investment in that revenue potential by providing the facilities, the arena, negotiating TV exposure, coaching, etc. The player is providing a raw skill that needs to be developed, needs to be supported by a surrounding cast of players and absorbs none of the cost associated with supporting them.

Yes people are pissed because colleges have turned this into a million dollar enterprise but I don't believe corrupting amateurism is the answer.

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

You guys are swirling around and around in the tidy bowl of inevitability. I get it.

 

[TigerMoving]

If they are and get caught it’s bye bye!

Yep NCAA has everyone shaking in their boots!

 

[RolandSchitt]

also, their earning potential is enhanced by the school they choose.

since they are being paid for their earning potential off the court, what is player X going to earn if they just play street ball? what will they earn if they play at Morehead , what will they earn if they play at Kentucky?

so the idea of their value is very much dependent on the choices they make. Putting on the Kentucky , Duke, UNC, , whatever uniform provides them exposure. The college is making an investment in that revenue potential by providing the facilities, the arena, negotiating TV exposure, coaching, etc. The player is providing a raw skill that needs to be developed, needs to be supported by a surrounding cast of players and absorbs none of the cost associated with supporting them.

Yes people are pissed because colleges have turned this into a million dollar enterprise but I don't believe corrupting amateurism is the answer.

But the players are why you have the revenue in the first place to build those facilities, arena, get tv deals and hire big name coaches. People are literally watching UK because of the players. When you take the players away what's left?

 

[Chuckinden]

College basketball has just about shat the bed anyway. Paying players would just hasten its demise.

 

[cathouse_rivals216755]

Can you imagine if say .. Brandon Boston were being paid this year ? You want that ?

So. If we are paying the players, making them employees of the university, does that mean we can fire their @ss for non-performance? Insubordination? Failure to follow work rules?

Might not be that bad of a deal.

 

[TankedCat]

That is literally apples to apples. Currently, at UK, to live in a 4 person suite in Baldwin Hall is 3979 a semester. That isn't even 8 grand a year. You can opt for a deluxe suite or 2 person or single, but those do cost more and are personal options. All of those options are more expensive than getting your own housing. Which is why most all UK football players take their housing allowance and do just that.

If you are paying that much, I would advise investing in a property near campus and letting your child live there for school. Then you can sell it or rent it after. If she has friends she wants to live with, rent the extra rooms to them to cover the mortgage payment. All you would be out is the initial down payment, which you could recoup later.

If I was paying that kind of money to a school, I definitely wouldn't have a problem with them giving it back to students. Even if they are athletes.

you're missing the point, its what it costs . Yes there are cheaper alternatives, but its not uniform to every college

We aren't going to recruit kids to come to college by telling them , yea, we could put you in a 2 person suite with a private bath, but we could also put 8 of you in an apartment off State street. We're going to put our athletes in the best housing we can support for them on campus. You have to go with comparables. Athletes are going to get the best the college offers, and the price they put on isn't going to be college on a budget plan, living in an off campus apartment and eating ramen.

 

[cathouse_rivals216755]

But the players are why you have the revenue in the first place to build those facilities, arena, get tv deals and hire big name coaches. People are literally watching UK because of the players. When you take the players away what's left?

On the flip side of your argument, when you take away UK and other schools, then where are the players going to play?

G-league, overseas, or back to street ball if they are not good enough to go straight to the NBA.

 

[ManitouDan_anon]

This can all be settled by letting the players, who want to, go to the G League, or the NBA out of high school. In fact, if a kid wants to go to either, prior to graduating, and his parents approved, let him go to the G League. Forcing a player to go to college for one year, basically accomplishes nothing, if he doesn't want to be there.
We have diluted the education system so much, where students can get a degree, that is basically worthless. The only thing a lot of them can say is, "I graduated from college." How many athletes in football and basketball have a degree in science, math, pre med, and other hard courses. Not many! Before you start criticizing me for the truth, I am not saying their not smart enough, because they are. They just don't have the time with all the practice and other constraints on their time. How many of the athletes that are "One and Done," take hard courses. In fact, a player could enroll, go to class very little, and still be eligible for the one year he is in college. A lot of teachers will pass good athletes, regardless of whether their doing the work, or not. Some on here will say, "You don't know what your talking about," but I do, and that's just the way it is.
Last year, on a bet with my Grand daughter, who is a teacher in Louisville, bet me I couldn't teach the kids today. She said, "Papaw, they would run you off." I said, "We will see about that."
I did substitute teaching last year, in high school, about 2 days a week, and enjoyed it. It didn't pay much, but I was not in it for the money. I did enjoy it! Will I do it again, probably not.

OLD STOLL FIELD GUY

Wait , you " tryna" to tell me a degree in Afro-American studies Fine Arts or Gender whatever is basically worthless ?? LOL Damn Who knew ???? LOL

 

[TankedCat]

But the players are why you have the revenue in the first place to build those facilities, arena, get tv deals and hire big name coaches. People are literally watching UK because of the players. When you take the players away what's left?

I don't agree with the premise that it has to be top tier guys that would command huge dollars for their likeness the day they stepped on campus.

UK would be a bit different but UK doesn't need an Anthony Davis or John Wall, UK would be just fine with the second tier players developed , especially in the era of G-league.
Matter of fact, given we have only 1 national title in the long string of uber talented players we have had come thru here, its hard to make the argument they we're better off with them than having a more traditional approach to developing strong players over the course of 3-4 years.

Of course those players would eventually be very popular but it would be built up over time with their growth at UK. Their revenue potential would be tied directly to their performance at Kentucky. And I've already said I'd support some kind of profit sharing for the entire team as long as it was shared equally among the players.

 

[cathouse_rivals216755]

College Basketball was supposed to be somewhat related to College, correct? One-n-Done has already made a joke of the value of college. We were pushing the boundary for years with "partial qualifiers" but at least we could feel good about getting someone into school who wouldn't have otherwise.

Tons of parents hope, pray, and strive to get their kids even partial scholarships. Some young people go into the service to get a degree.

I'm fine with young men who prefer to get paid, to go get paid. However, it should have nothing to do with college. We all got along just fine without Kobe and Lebron. We'll survive.

There really is a simple fix to this whole mess.
The NCAA needs to go back to being for AMATEUR ATHLETICS ONLY.

If a player has the ability to make money off of his talent, then they can pursue that through the professional leagues that actually pay players to play.

If the player desires to attend college and has the talent to play college sports, then they could accept a college scholarship.

If you are good enough to get paid you have the opportunity to do so. If you want to be a college athlete, that option would also be available.

Money corrupts everything.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Do you realize how much money OK St has? How high do you imagine this bidding war going? OK St could throw millions at him without blinking. They would match anything UK or any blue blood offered....and thus, the decision would come down to other factors, like where his brother coaches

You're making my point for me. Oklahoma St. is not a basketball power. Pickens is dead now so they may not have as much to play with but they are a non-basketball but lets say they do. If they want to buy players for basketball, they would. They have far more money than we do. There would be a dominance shift to schools with wealthy and willing to pay boosters instead of traditional basketball powers.

 

[RolandSchitt]

you're missing the point, its what it costs . Yes there are cheaper alternatives, but its not uniform to every college

We aren't going to recruit kids to come to college by telling them , yea, we could put you in a 2 person suite with a private bath, but we could also put 8 of you in an apartment off State street. We're going to put our athletes in the best housing we can support for them on campus. You have to go with comparables. Athletes are going to get the best the college offers, and the price they put on isn't going to be college on a budget plan, living in an off campus apartment and eating ramen.

Not at all. You choose to pay that much. You have other alternatives, even at the same school.

But we don't put our student athletes in the best housing. That is literally why much of the football team lives off campus. Basketball players are required to live in Coal Lodge. Which is far from nice. It needs to be demolished and rebuilt. It's literally like the oldest housing structure in campus now.

On the flip side of your argument, when you take away UK and other schools, then where are the players going to play?

G-league, overseas, or back to street ball if they are not good enough to go straight to the NBA.

They will go with whatever replaces it as the primary option. Then UK and college athletics because irrelevant or no more. Which is literally my point. College athletics can't exist without the athletes.

I don't agree with the premise that is has to be top tier guys that would command huge dollars for their likeness the day they stepped on campus.

UK would be a bit different but UK doesn't need an Anthony Davis or John Wall, UK would be just fine with the second tier players developed , especially in the era of G-league.
Matter of fact, given we have only 1 national title in the long string of uber talented players we have had come thru here, its hard to make the argument they we're better off with them than having a more traditional approach to developing strong players over the course of 3-4 years.

Of course those players would eventually be very popular but it would be built up over time with their growth at UK. Their revenue potential would be tied directly to their performance at Kentucky. And I've already said I'd support some kind of profit sharing for the entire team as long as it was shared equally among the players.

Anyone can demand money for their likeness, but it doesn't mean they'll get it. If they aren't a top tier guy, much like a franchise player, their likeness won't be heavily used in the first place to require payment.

We would for sure have 1 less title without Davis. Several less final fours without some of the other top guys. A lot less wins. Hell, we would be on a 24 year title drought. Most teams around the country with 3 and 4 year guys have had much less success. Skill is far more valuable than age.

That system is fine if it is done annually. You can’t force someone to stay four years to collect income they generate 3 years prior. That would borderline indentured servitude.

 

[TankedCat]

We would for sure have 1 less title without Davis. Several less final fours without some of the other top guys. A lot less wins. Hell, we would be on a 24 year title drought. Most teams around the country with 3 and 4 year guys have had much less success. Skill is far more valuable than age.

how many teams that were OAD focused won a national championship since Cal began coaching at UK


also, this may be before your time but the NCAA actually told Kentucky to put regular students into Wildcat Lodge because it was too nice/exclusive....of course maybe you expect everyone to have an onsite chef as part of that low cost college plan.

 

[JwUKFan11]

Undervalued, in my opinion.

So it should cost even more for someone to go to school for the piece of paper that basically says you can write essays?

 

[sambowieshin_rivals]

I got paid minimum wage to work an on campus job. I received no scholarship.
I paid my loans back.....completed my degree and make a decent living now.
I didn't suffer from not being paid **** tons of money to work on campus for the university. I learned how to manage what little money I made in order to feed and entertain myself. The life lessons served me well and made me appreciate real money when it finally came (and teaching money is not anything to get excited over!)
These kids are already getting free housing, free food, free education, free athletic trainers and a possible ticket to making millions as a professional athlete.
They need to be allowed to make some extra money on the side like all college kids...but the university is already compensating them for their athletic skills.
Shut up and dribble....entitled whiners.

 

[TBCat]

what????????????? That makes zero sense. Why can't they earn the money as they generate it? How does the walk-on generate as much as say Zion Williamson? Equitable for all parties, now we're back to communist principles. Equity in this country is equity of opportunity, not outcomes.

Amateurism has nothing to do with communist principals. You don't seem to have an understanding what these things are. Players still live in a capitalist society. Not paying college athletes doesn't change that at all. Should we be paying 12 year olds on the Elementary school kick ball team as well? Are we denying capitalism if we don't? Of course not. The NCAA is a private organization. They choose what rules they have and one of the rules governs what money players can accept. The NCAA has every right to do so.

The NBA doesn't even cover free market the way you are describing. The players when drafted are told where they have to live.

I don't care if they get paid or not. I'm way past the pure amateurism stuff. However schools should be bullied into paying. And opening it up for salaries is going to get very problematic very fast. For starters if they are being paid then it's no longer a scholarship they are playing under, it's a contract. This would all be kill the ability to transfer. You are also creating a business model that can't be sustained. There is no way that most schools would continue to be able to pay the salary escalations that would undoubtedly occur. The NBA can barely support 30 something teams. There is no way to support 300+ like there are in college. That would create massive disparity between programs that could end up with several colleges stop funding their programs altogether.

Getting paid for their likeness is doable but it's also problematic as well because it will introduce agents to the mix. That can only be done if it's done in a controlled way and one that doesn't allow shoe companies to basically dictate your starting lineups.

 

[RolandSchitt]

how many teams that were OAD focused won national championship since Cal began coaching at UK

also, this may be before your time but the NCAA actually told Kentucky to put regular students into Wildcat Lodge because it was too nice/exclusive....of course maybe you expect everyone to have an onsite chef as part of that low cost college plan.

1 title, 1 runner-up, 2 more final fours and 3 more elite 8's. All of which were contributed heavily by top tier players in year 1. Are you willing to part with that?

It may have been 40 years ago, but that isn't today. You might live in the nicest house in town 40 years ago, doesn't mean it is today.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

But the players are why you have the revenue in the first place to build those facilities, arena, get tv deals and hire big name coaches. People are literally watching UK because of the players. When you take the players away what's left?

No, that is a false argument. The programs and fan support create the revenue. So long as the playing field were equal, it wouldn't matter who was in the jerseys. Fans would watch and casual fans would still watch the tournament. How old are you? You really believe UK fans watch because of certain players?

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

@RolandSchitt
Ah, that's cute. You have no response so you use an emoji. You're getting younger by the minute.

 

[TigerMoving]

You're making my point for me. Oklahoma St. is not a basketball power. Pickens is dead now so they may not have as much to play with but they are a non-basketball but lets say they do. If they want to buy players for basketball, they would. They have far more money than we do. There would be a dominance shift to schools with wealthy and willing to pay boosters instead of traditional basketball powers.

My point is that basically every P5 school can match the market rate. All these schools have a bottomless bucket of cash and it will eventually come down to other factors for a lot of players. UK, Duke and UNC will buy their share, but they cant buy them all. Biggest change is that we can now outbid the G-league and Euro/Australia leagues

 

[willievic]

1 title, 1 runner-up, 2 more final fours and 3 more elite 8's. All of which were contributed heavily by top tier players in year 1. Are you willing to part with that?

It may have been 40 years ago, but that isn't today. You might live in the nicest house in town 40 years ago, doesn't mean it is today.

How many of those happened since 2016? The game has changed, and coaches need to change with it, or suffer a LOSING record.

OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!

 

[TankedCat]

1 title, 1 runner-up, 2 more final fours and 3 more elite 8's. All of which were contributed heavily by top tier players in year 1. Are you willing to part with that?

It may have been 40 years ago, but that isn't today. You might live in the nicest house in town 40 years ago, doesn't mean it is today.

NIT, worst season in history of UK basketball, multiple years straight of no final four. All of which were contributed heavily by top tier players in year 1.

Yea, I'm willing to part with that.

and I'm done talking to you about college costs. I'd be willing to bet your views on this are in the minority.

 

[RolandSchitt]

No, that is a false argument. The programs and fan support create the revenue. So long as the playing field were equal, it wouldn't matter who was in the jerseys. Fans would watch and casual fans would still watch the tournament. How old are you? You really believe UK fans watch because of certain players?

Literally, yes! Look around the country at all the programs with average players you have never heard of and check out their attendance and viewership ratings. Then check out the programs with well known players. You will notice one is much higher.

No one normally gives a **** about OSU basketball for instance. They add Cunningham, suddenly everyone is watching them. Same situation with Edwards and UGA. Normally no one gives a **** about Iowa basketball, but now they have Garza and people watch. Dayton and Toppin last year. Think Curry and Davidson.

You might want to consider it takes a minute to actually reply before you say someone isn't.

 

[gossie21_rivals69805]

That’s such a dumb argument it doesn’t really merit a response, but here it is. Coaches, ADs, etc. are employees. Players are NOT. They are students. Do you think college coaches are going to coach for free? It’s their job! They do it for a living. As for players getting “compensation” in the form of an education, room and board, etc., that’s the way it’s set up. Do you think most of those guys could pay for all of that? It’s called a scholarship. There are many types of scholarships. Academic scholarships for example. Is an engineering student on an academic scholarship an employee? No. Are they a professional engineer? No, they’re a student just like athletes. College athletics was originally set up for school spirit, bring students and fans together, and as a way for some students to get their college paid for. It’s been corrupted.

You failed to explain why "amateurism matters." It's okay for some people to get paid because "it's their job." But athletes aren't even being asked to get paid for playing basketball. They're asking to be allowed to make money from separate business interests. Coaches can write a book and get paid for it. Why can't a player write a book and get paid for it? The only students on a college campus that are prevented from earning money from outside work are student-athletes.

I know I'm not changing any minds. And BBFGa won't change mine. My disgust with the NCAA's forced amateurism goes back decades. I think it is a horrible and oppressive system. I am glad the athletes finally have a platform and are using it. I really hope every top recruit goes to Florida, California.... states with laws to protect the athletes ability to participate in the free market like everyone else in this country. The NCAA will never change, they will never negotiate fairly, unless they are forced to by state laws.

 

[RolandSchitt]

NIT, worst season in history of UK basketball, multiple years straight of no final four. All of which were contributed heavily by top tier players in year 1.

Yea, I'm willing to part with that.

and I'm done talking to you about college costs. I'd be willing to bet your views on this are in the minority.

Also in the weirdest year in modern history. I wouldn't put too much emphasis on that. We have had 6 years with no F4. 1 of those had no tournament, 2 of them we were a shot away. Not really too bad. The stretches between Hall's last and Pitino's first was longer. As was Smith's to Cal's. Hell, even Rupp had a longer drought in his tenure.

Thia team also only had 1 top tier guy who played much. And he was a top player in a down class, and was obviously mis ranked a bit.

 

[sk73]

I see many on here think it is fine if the college athlete makes money off their name and likeness. I agree with those people. In fact the college athlete is the only (student) that can not have a part time job. To my knowledge, the athletes are the only student group that cant earn any type of money while in college. If I am a gifted music major, I can compose, I can play in symphonies etc. to earn money. If I am an art major, I can sell my work to earn money. The list goes on and on. I understand the old school guys saying , go to the pros if you dont like it. I get that sentiment, but back in the day players could work during the school year. It was stopped because many players received wages and didnt have to show up for work.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

Room and board isn't actually close to that much. You can split an apt on campus for roughly 400 per person. That usually includes utilities and internet. That's only 4800 per year. And trust me, wildcat coal lodge isn't nice enough to be levying those kind of fees.

I don't know what books your kids need, but mine were less than a 1000 per year. Buy them used or rent them for the semester. A lot of classes you didn't even need them.

Do you ever know what you're talking about? https://www.uky.edu/financialaid/tuition-and-fees

 

[RolandSchitt]

Do you ever know what you're talking about? https://www.uky.edu/financialaid/tuition-and-fees

Yea, because I was actually smart enough to go to their housing website instead of a generalized form that reports the highest possible figures.

https://www.uky.edu/housing/rates

Use your brain big guy, it's not just designed to be a lump 3 ft above your ***.

 

[dckala2_rivals16641]

Happy was ahead of the curve, “we owe them this money, we owe it to them!”

 

[ok-cats-computer]

So it should cost even more for someone to go to school for the piece of paper that basically says you can write essays?

I don’t think getting a degree should cost more, but I think you are underestimating the value of a degree. In my opinion, a degree is much more than a piece of paper. Having a degree on a resume opens up many potential employment options with higher pay that wouldn’t otherwise be available.

 

[ShadowFromHomewardBound]

Players protesting not getting paid.
I can see this working out great....... for the G League.
Players wanting to meet with Emmert, Crazy Uncle Joe, Congress, even the SCOTUS. All to talk about getting paid.
Both sides need to tread lightly.
I could see it going badly.
Players being focused on the money sports generate. Admin focusing on free education, and the value of said education.
G League licking their chops. College sports fans on the other hand........

Thing is, does anyone watch the G league?
Unless you live in one of those cities, why?

College basketball is done lol. Such a **** show now.

 

[TigerMoving]

Uncheats gave fake educations/diplomas to athletes for decades and the NCAA said that was cool. That kinda destroys the "value of an education" theory the NCAA used to have going for it.

 

[ShadowFromHomewardBound]

They can always NOT go to college and NOT accept a free scholarship.


Go to the G league, or train all year in preparation for the draft. Nobody is forcing you to go to college:


They want to go to college, especially the big schools, because it helps them too.


This is a damn joke

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

There really is a simple fix to this whole mess.
The NCAA needs to go back to being for AMATEUR ATHLETICS ONLY.

If a player has the ability to make money off of his talent, then they can pursue that through the professional leagues that actually pay players to play.

If the player desires to attend college and has the talent to play college sports, then they could accept a college scholarship.

If you are good enough to get paid you have the opportunity to do so. If you want to be a college athlete, that option would also be available.

Money corrupts everything.

Well said. Everyone is mired in the minutiae of trying to prop up an illegitimate and unsustainable model. I do wish it weren't so, but busting up the NCAA model is inevitable. I've been okay for a long time watching it for the entertainment value alone knowing what it really is. But trying to defend it is rather silly.

 

[UKfan2151]

And what happens when college football players want their cut? Schools might be able to afford to pay a 13 player basketball roster. But can they also pay an 85 player football roster? What about when the women's teams, baseball, tennis, golf and other sports demand the same? This is a very slippery slope that could quickly end college athletics altogether.

 

[Bobio]

And by the way, not a single collegiate musician is forced to go to college. They can go play jazz clubs, arenas, open mics for a year or until they sign a record deal. They go to college because they know it benefits them. Otherwise they wouldn’t go.

Do you understand what I did with your post?

 

[Ky_Bred_Cat]

And what happens when college football players want their cut? Schools might be able to afford to pay a 13 player basketball roster. But can they also pay an 85 player football roster? What about when the women's teams, baseball, tennis, golf and other sports demand the same? This is a very slippery slope that could quickly end college athletics altogether.

That's the thing. The NCAA has two choices - go all in amateur or allow athletes of all stripes to pursue revenue. The amateur only model suggests some draconian guidelines as the only way to maintain that status that would eliminate a lot of the best athletes. Allowing athletes to pursue revenue would be the end of college sports as we know it. Neither option is good. The NCAA brought this on themselves.

 

[Soupbean]

There is no reason they shouldn't be able to make money off their name. Autographs, social media, ads, clothing, etc. Now, actual compensation for playing- nope.

They can do that right, go do it. But not as a COLLEGE athlete competing under COLLEGE amatuer rules. If you dont want to be in the club, dont join the club. Its that simple

 

[Bobio]

Athletes aren’t prohibited from making money. They can get a summer job. UK players used to do it all the time in the past, but most aren’t interested in that today. They just can’t make money related to athletics. Tell me how another student is going to make money besides working for it. I’ll wait.

A student on a music scholarship is allowed to play weekend gigs, sell their music, post videos on youtube, etc. Why are you against this?