Chris McCullough Isn't The Problem, College Athletics Is The Problem

[pfister1]

Syracuse's basketball program is one of the most profitable in the country. They'd be fine. Besides, I don't think public schools are going to be able to make a habit of using taxpayer money on basketball recruits.

They don't have to use State money. How much larger is their alumni base?

 

[Madbiker]

Lol.

Hate to break it to you. Boosters are buying recruits now through the guise of "facilities"
The only difference is the money will actually be hitting the players pockets.
Oh the horror

Yes, it happens some now but the NCAA keeps it in check. If it is made legal it will be so much worse and the mega state factories with lots of rich crazy boosters will get all the talent. Let me break it to you...SU isn't going to be one of them.

 

[djcon57]

Yes, it happens some now but the NCAA keeps it in check. If it is made legal it will be so much worse and the mega state factories with lots of rich crazy boosters will get all the talent. Let me break it to you...SU isn't going to be one of them.

So are we talking about what's fair for the players or what's fair for Syracuse fans?

I'm confused with the discussion at hand here.

 

[rrlbees]

Lol. Hate to break it to you. Boosters are buying recruits now through the guise of "facilities" The only difference is the money will actually be hitting the players pockets. Oh the horror

If the players want money they could go gets jobs and not go to college.

 

[Madbiker]

So are we talking about what's fair for the players or what's fair for Syracuse fans?

I'm confused with the discussion at hand here.

Probably what is a workable system to continue college athletics that doesn't kill the golden goose yet makes things better for the players. I'm not against the players somehow getting increased compensation. But the idea of allowing boosters or any private business to directly pay individual players will destroy any competitive fairness in college sports. Most of the plans being talked about would put money into a general fund that would be paid out equally to scholarship athletes. Then you have the legal entanglements that ALL non-revenue sport athletes on scholarship have to be treated equally or there are going to be gigantic law suits. It opens up a lot of problems.

 

[pfister1]

It really isn't an NBA problem. The problem is an NCAA problem. It stems from the desire to make college athletics primarily a money making venture rather than an extra curricular activity.

You can justify it 100 ways to Sunday, but the moment you argue that a scholarship isn't enough compensation you've lost your way.

If you want to fix the "problem" create a minor league for all those players who need something more than the scholarship. Those players are there for the wrong reason. You go to college to get an education and that education is not in the physical act of plying a sport.

 

[djcon57]

But the idea of allowing boosters or any private business to directly pay individual players will destroy any competitive fairness in college sports.

Non P5 schools would say it already is unfair.

 

[triplethrea]

If McCullough is having a child and is leaving in part because he wants to provide for his family, wouldn't it be so much simpler if he could profit from his own name and license and maintain his eligibility as a college player? Why can't Dinosaur BBQ contract with him to spend a few hours every Saturday in the restaurant signing autographs? Or hey, why can't he get a stipend from Nike?

THAT WOULD RUIN THE STUDENT ATHLETE!!!!!!!11111

 

[triplethrea]

If you allow that, boosters will literally be "buying" recruits. The only way to keep a semblance of a level playing field would be to put such money into a common players fund to be divided equally among all players. How you make that work I have no idea.

So you want to make a mini-Communist NCAA. Every man is equal, every man gets 1 toilet paper roll per month.

Cut the BS, if you're good you should be paid whatever people are willing to pay for you. If Syracuse wants to give McCollough $500,000 to play his sophomore year they should be able to. If Kentucky wants to give $3 million to Karl Towns, they should be able to.

Currently the NCAA is set up like the Premier League. Rich get richer, except they don't pay money, they pay in facilities and fame. If we instituted a salary cap, I would be fine with that.

 

[djcon57]

If you want to fix the "problem" create a minor league for all those players who need something more than the scholarship. Those players are there for the wrong reason. You go to college to get an education and that education is not in the physical act of plying a sport.

I 100% agree with you, but who's creating the minor league?

As discussed, the NBA has no problem with the 1 and done. They don't want their scouts dealing with high school gyms and whatnot.

 

[rrlbees]

So you want to make a mini-Communist NCAA. Every man is equal, every man gets 1 toilet paper roll per month. Cut the BS, if you're good you should be paid whatever people are willing to pay for you. If Syracuse wants to give McCollough $500,000 to play his sophomore year they should be able to. If Kentucky wants to give $3 million to Karl Towns, they should be able to. Currently the NCAA is set up like the Premier League. Rich get richer, except they don't pay money, they pay in facilities and fame. If we instituted a salary cap, I would be fine with that.

The BS are these schemes to allow schools or boosters to pay ridiculous amounts of money to players. If they want to play for pay, go to Europe. Or if they don't want to go to college but want money, get a job.

As to facilities. Who paid for the Melo Center? 100% boosters. Who gets the benefit? 100% the players.

 

[djcon57]

The BS are these schemes to allow schools or boosters to pay ridiculous amounts of money to players. If they want to play for pay, go to Europe. Or if they don't want to go to college but want money, get a job.

As to facilities. Who oId for the Melo Center? 100% boosters. Who gets the benefit? 100% the players.

Why is BS for "boosters" or whomever other than the schools to play players?
Because it won't benefit Syracuse?

If some rich guy wants to pay someone to attend a school to play basketball and covers the scholarship as well, why is this a bad thing?

 

[rrlbees]

Why is BS for "boosters" or whomever other than the schools to play players? Because it won't benefit Syracuse? If some rich guy wants to pay someone to attend a school to play basketball and covers the scholarship as well, why is this a bad thing?

Because it isn't pay for play professional basketball.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Because SU will not fare well in a free for all bidding environment against big state schools.

That doesn't matter.

Because it isn't pay for play professional basketball.

It wouldn't be. Being able to profit from your name and likeness is completely different.

If you allow that, boosters will literally be "buying" recruits. The only way to keep a semblance of a level playing field would be to put such money into a common players fund to be divided equally among all players. How you make that work I have no idea.

I don't care about a level playing field. There are bigger issues at stake.

But even if you're convinced that the playing field won't be level... well, look at the Yankees. Sure, they spend a lot, but that doesn't guarantee wins. They can still only have a 25 man roster. College athletics would be the same. Take a situation like Nate Wolters - a star at the hotbed known as South Dakota State University. There are absolutely businesses in that area that would treasure an endorsement from him. Or what about communities looking for positive female athlete role models? Or the attention athletes in the olympic sports would get every four years. People cry because of what they think Alabama and Kentucky would do, but why? Athletics is so much bigger than a handful of programs. Maybe athletes want to go elsewhere because they look at the situations and want to pick the one that makes the most sense for them. Maybe being a hometown hero profits. Maybe it doesn't. Let's allow them the chance to figure that out.

not sure if this was meant as a joke or not but this is a borderline insane idea. why would CM5 stay in school when its his life long dream to play in the nba? he'll get paid whether he has a long or short career. honestly I think you have no idea how the ncaa works or the licensing agreements for student athlete's. there is a reason why college players cant get paid for jerseys with their names on them. for the last time CM5 is doing what is best for him.

I agree that he's trying to do what is best for himself. I'm proposing that it would be a good thing if he had a wider range of choices, among which is profiting from his own name and likeness. That's a right I believe everyone has (or should have as an unalienable right) in today's digital world. College athletes do not. It's absurd.

You can justify it 100 ways to Sunday, but the moment you argue that a scholarship isn't enough compensation you've lost your way.

That's quite insidious actually. The NCAA can't have a trump card like that where the value of a scholarship can never be fairly calculated or questioned so long as the income generated for athletics is variable. That's incredibly unjust.

 

[CuseHulk]

Please adopt the Baseball rule.

Let them go out of high school, and if you choose to go to college have to stay minimum 3 years.

 

[orangenirvana]

It's not the money from the school or taxpayers that's the problem. It's money from the crazy boosters. State schools have a much bigger network with more $$$. Boosters from Penn St, Ohio St, Michigan, UK, KU, UNC, FSU, IU, UF, UT, etc. aren't going to be outbid for a kid they want -- at least not without a bidding war. "Son I'm prepared to offer you $200k a year for the use of your likeness and personal endorsement of my xxxx business and I know several other prominent school boosters who will want to offer you similar arrangements -- if you choose our school."

Then there should be policy against excessive payments from boosters and an enforcement agency specifically for that issue. That potential problem alone shouldn't be enough to prevent these student athletes from being rewarded their fair share.

 

[orangenirvana]

I agree with pretending they are amateurs but wouldn't the answer simply be to do away with any one-and-done rule? If you're good enough to pay for play and you want to do it you have two options -- nba draft and europe. If there is a market for some sort of minor league hoops set-up (like the D League except, you know, an actual developmental league where legit prospects go to develop), then great, start that too.

But for those kids not good enough to play in the NBA straight out of high school and not interested in playing for pay elsewhere, go to college, try to improve and maybe even -- hey, this is a novel idea -- get a degree!!!! (and, as a note here, I really don't care if you want to cheat in every class. Go for it, what do I care?)

The notion that a kid *deserves* pay simply b/c the university is making money is somewhat ridiculous, IMO. I've never seen anyone put anything together like this, but if you calculate the actual value of a college diploma (and I"m fine with full rides including room and board, text books, etc) as well as the perks like access to state-of-the-art workout facilites, strength coaches, dietary consultants, tutors, priority scheduling, social standing (let's not pretend that being on a college team doesn't carry some nice social perks), etc. -- it's really a pretty solid deal. Especially if you consider that A -- you have options pay for play and B -- if you're really offended by the universities selling tickets and allowing you to play in front of thousands of screaming fans, you can not play basketball.

They already have a minor league hoops set up. It's called Division 1 college basketball. They need to truly go all in and stop the 'amateur student athlete' charade.

The 'free education' thing is a nice deal but it's silly. At least half of these kids aren't going to college for an education - they're going to play basketball. So much money is being made off of these young men's (and women's to a much lesser extent) cheap labor, it passed the point of absurdity a long time ago. And telling them 'Don't like it? Well you can not play basketball' isn't good enough.

 

[rrlbees]

They already have a minor league hoops set up. It's called Division 1 college basketball. They need to truly go all in and stop the 'amateur student athlete' charade. The 'free education' thing is a nice deal but it's silly. At least half of these kids aren't going to college for an education - they're going to play basketball. So much money is being made off of these young men's (and women's to a much lesser extent) cheap labor, it passed the point of absurdity a long time ago. And telling them 'Don't like it? Well you can not play basketball' isn't good enough.

Paying kids some stipend isn't a big deal. Paying them oodles of money like a professional athlete is a big deal. A big stupid one. Money SU brings in goes right back to the student athlete in some way. Why do most AD's run in the red? People act like the schools are making all this money off kids then putting it in their pockets. Why does college have to be the minor leagues? They are not forced to go to college. Not even to get paid for their skills. Seems like people should be beefing with the NBA for not having a MLB type minor league system.

 

[Dave85]

http://www.nunesmagician.com/2015/4...-the-problem-college-athletics-is-the-problem
Great read once again from Sean.

It's just okay. I would prefer college players having a little more loyalty to their college fans. Sorry, that's how I fell and I am going to stick to my opinion. I know bunch of people here say screw the college fans it's all about what's best for the player. But Orange basketball would not be same without the fans. Fans are big part of why Orange basketball is so special.

 

[Dave85]

Paying kids some stipend isn't a big deal. Paying them oodles of money like a professional athlete is a big deal. A big stupid one. Money SU brings in goes right back to the student athlete in some way. Why do most AD's run in the red? People act like the schools are making all this money off kids then putting it in their pockets. Why does college have to be the minor leagues? They are not forced to go to college. Not even to get paid for their skills. Seems like people should be beefing with the NBA for not having a MLB type minor league system.

I heard the ad revenue from the NCAA tournament was close to a billion dollars. Most student athletes will not make any money at all from all their hard work. It just doesn't seem fair. I tend to agree with this commentary:

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Paying kids some stipend isn't a big deal. Paying them oodles of money like a professional athlete is a big deal. A big stupid one. Money SU brings in goes right back to the student athlete in some way. Why do most AD's run in the red? People act like the schools are making all this money off kids then putting it in their pockets. Why does college have to be the minor leagues? They are not forced to go to college. Not even to get paid for their skills. Seems like people should be beefing with the NBA for not having a MLB type minor league system.

Which, again, is why you don't have the schools pay the players, you just permit them to sign endorsements and profit from their own names and likenesses.

 

[orangenirvana]

Paying kids some stipend isn't a big deal. Paying them oodles of money like a professional athlete is a big deal. A big stupid one. Money SU brings in goes right back to the student athlete in some way. Why do most AD's run in the red? People act like the schools are making all this money off kids then putting it in their pockets. Why does college have to be the minor leagues? They are not forced to go to college. Not even to get paid for their skills. Seems like people should be beefing with the NBA for not having a MLB type minor league system.

Whose fault is it that "most AD's run in the red"? Is that a justification that the college athletes should continue to be exploited?

No one would be forced to pay "oodles of money" for the athletes. How can these universities find the money to pay anyone that works for the college? Is the data analyst in the institutional research department generating more money for the university than a single player on the football team? One gets paid a salary for the work they're contributing to the university, the other does not.

 

[djcon57]

Which, again, is why you don't have the schools pay the players, you just permit them to sign endorsements and profit from their own names and likenesses.

But then it won't be fair...cause you know boosters will make it unfair... like how fair it is right now to watch U of Oregon football brought to you by Phil Knight and Nike

 

[Timonen]

If McCullough is having a child and is leaving in part because he wants to provide for his family, wouldn't it be so much simpler if he could profit from his own name and license and maintain his eligibility as a college player? Why can't Dinosaur BBQ contract with him to spend a few hours every Saturday in the restaurant signing autographs? Or hey, why can't he get a stipend from Nike?

This is exactly the solution. Iconic players could get national deals. Good players a little less. Bench players could sign autographs at the mall and car dealership. It's so simple. It might even knock some big school down a bit because players who are 6th and 7th guys on powerhouses would have a greater incentive to be a leader/producer at a lower level school.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

This is exactly the solution. Iconic players could get national deals. Good players a little less. Bench players could sign autographs at the mall and car dealership. It's so simple. It might even knock some big school down a bit because players who are 6th and 7th guys on powerhouses would have a greater incentive to be a leader/producer at a lower level school.

EXACTLY