Whitlock equates NCAA to slavery?

[RedLantern]

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefoot...2210?GT1=39002

Wow, I am surprisingly insulted by this article. I agree that something needs to be done to reform the NCAA, perhaps limiting coach's compensation, but to equate participation in NCAA to slavery is pretty bad. First, I need not point out that playing football in voluntary, and that they are in fact compensated. In addition, playing football is FUN, the kids enjoy it, thats why the do it. Lastly, the fact that the players get litte to no reward from the revenue they produce should not be a shocking proposition to anyone familiar with corporate america . . .

 

[Mark from Plano]

College football and basketball are the two biggest rackets on the planet. I don't know if I'd use the slavery analogy, but it is a fundamentally flawed system. The idea of the mythical "amateur athlete" is one that, if not dead, is nearly so. Even the Olympics have given up on that standard. The only reason for keeping college athletes as "amateurs" is so that the colleges don't have to share any of their massive revenues with them.

But the folks with the greatest vested interest in maintaining the status quo is the NFL and the NBA, who aren't required to finance their own farm systems in those sports. Ultimately, a pro baseball prospect has the legitimate option of going into the minor leagues (and getting paid) or going to college if they really want a degree. Football and basketball players have no such option. Saying that college athletics is voluntary is pretty laughable, IMO. It's only optional if you give up your aspirations of playing those sports professionally.

Systems sucks. Need to eliminate the NCAA rules and start compensating the players for what they bring to to colleges.

 

[RedLantern]

its not laughable to say it's voluntary when my point is to say that it is insulting to say that NCAA athletes are slaves.

I agree with most of your post though. I'm not sure that the schools need to flat-out pay their players, but I think the NCAA should rethink "amateur status" for sure.

 

[Dashaansafin]

Kids get full scholarships. Im not sure what more you could want.

 

[HORNS]

Originally Posted by Mark from Plano

College football and basketball are the two biggest rackets on the planet. I don't know if I'd use the slavery analogy, but it is a fundamentally flawed system. The idea of the mythical "amateur athlete" is one that, if not dead, is nearly so. Even the Olympics have given up on that standard. The only reason for keeping college athletes as "amateurs" is so that the colleges don't have to share any of their massive revenues with them. But the folks with the greatest vested interest in maintaining the status quo is the NFL and the NBA, who aren't required to finance their own farm systems in those sports. Ultimately, a pro baseball prospect has the legitimate option of going into the minor leagues (and getting paid) or going to college if they really want a degree. Football and basketball players have no such option. Saying that college athletics is voluntary is pretty laughable, IMO. It's only optional if you give up your aspirations of playing those sports professionally. Systems sucks. Need to eliminate the NCAA rules and start compensating the players for what they bring to to colleges.
This pretty much sums it up for me. However, college sports is still, and will always be, my first love.

 

[JayJay]

Originally Posted by HORNS

This pretty much sums it up for me. However, college sports is still, and will always be, my first love.
Same with me, I LOVE college sports even though it operates in an imperfect system.

 

[Saul Silver]

Jason Whitlock is, and always will be, a ******* idiot.

There's tons of successful white college football players out there that bring in tons of money for the university (Tim Tebow anyone?) and a fair amount of (always failing) black coaches. Yet he has to spin it into some tiresome "whites oppressing blacks" mantra.

Anyone else LOL when he bragged about graduating from Ball State?

 

[Douglas]

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I don't see what ******* purpose college athletics serves if the players are getting paid. These programs are corrupt, bloated beasts that only vaguely support the academic mission that is the purpose of a college or university. You want to watch minor league sports? Go ahead. But paying players to show up and wear your colors and then rooting for it and wearing the national championship t-shirt and saying "I went there, suck it!" is completely and utterly marsupialed.

If they pay the players, the system should be decoupled from the institutions entirely.

 

[Teacher]

I'll agree that football and basketball are drastically flawed, but the slavery comparison makes him a ruh-TARD. Seriously, that's fucked up. Lucky for me, I don't watch football or basketball, so I don't have to worry about it.

Originally Posted by Douglas

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but I don't see what ******* purpose college athletics serves if the players are getting paid. These programs are corrupt, bloated beasts that only vaguely support the academic mission that is the purpose of a college or university. You want to watch minor league sports? Go ahead. But paying players to show up and wear your colors and then rooting for it and wearing the national championship t-shirt and saying "I went there, suck it!" is completely and utterly marsupialed.

If they pay the players, the system should be decoupled from the institutions entirely.

You know perfectly well the players aren't "getting paid." Scholarship money is not income. It can't be spent, it can only be used for an education. That's the point of student-athletes: get an education. Yes, I know, in some programs that isn't a priority. But in many programs, it is. My university's hockey team, which is one of the best in the country and has several NHL draftees on the roster, had a GPA above 3.0 last season. If a student has an unexcused absence from any class, the entire team gets a 6 am skate. I know this because I taught at the university and got to know several hockey players.

Besides, the way you put it, you're putting the responsibility of college sports on spectators. In fact, most college athletes would play if there were few or no spectators...and a large majority of them do just that. Most college athletes are not in football or basketball. The bleachers aren't usually filled for track/field, wrestling, field hockey, volleyball, etc. The point to college athletics -- outside of the NCAA's point of view -- is to produce well-rounded individuals (intellectually and physically) and to boost school spirit.

 

[Douglas]

whoah tiger. i wasn't suggesting they're getting paid now. i'm reacting to the arguments within this thread that suggest they should get paid.

as for the rest with track and field etc. yes i think those are perfectly legitimate collegiate athletics and I was pretty much referring to football, basketball, and the other big name sports.

 

[Dashaansafin]

Yea. Sports like tennis, swimming, track and field are fine for NCAA. Its basketball and football that really get me. In football the big schools, Michigan, USC, practially hire crooks. My friends who go to those schools always complain about how they think they can steal **** and get away with everything.

 

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by Dashaansafin

Yea. Sports like tennis, swimming, track and field are fine for NCAA. Its basketball and football that really get me. In football the big schools, Michigan, USC, practially hire crooks. My friends who go to those schools always complain about how they think they can steal **** and get away with everything.

I think some of that comes from the culture of idolatry and permissiveness that comes with sports, long before they get to college. High school football - in Texas at least - is howlingly bad about this. No matter that Johnny QB can't read or tends to **** young ladies, he can thread a needle at 50 yards, and that's what matters.

 

[JayJay]

Originally Posted by Thomas

I think some of that comes from the culture of idolatry and permissiveness that comes with sports, long before they get to college. High school football - in Texas at least - is howlingly bad about this. No matter that Johnny QB can't read or tends to **** young ladies, he can thread a needle at 50 yards, and that's what matters.
I agree, but prep schools are the worst at this.

 

[swaggerisaliability]

Originally Posted by Dashaansafin

Kids get full scholarships. Im not sure what more you could want.

And what about the schools that don't give scholarships yet still profit greatly from their basketball and football programs?

 

[MrG]

Originally Posted by swaggerisaliability

And what about the schools that don't give scholarships yet still profit greatly from their basketball and football programs?

These schools don't exist. Schools that don't offer schollies would never see enough revenue to break even, let alone profit. In fact, a vast majority of schools' athletic departments don't turn a profit, and operating in the black is the exception, rather than the rule, for college athletics.