OrangeXtreme
The Mayor of Dewitt
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 214,617
- Like
- 373,487
He's right.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a fishing rod and he eats for a lifetime.
Just make sure that you give the man the fishing rod!
The season is in the line this Saturday, a loss will mean another year of keeping you bowling ball in the closet
He told Mark Larson he hoped to be back for the Clemson game.That doesnt sound like a kid out for the season.
He's right.
Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Give a man a fishing rod and he eats for a lifetime.
Just make sure that you give the man the fishing rod!
He's right in his own experience. Sure.
How about this for an analogy.
Give a man a fish and eats for a day, teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime, pay a bunch of people to learn how to fish and catch all the fish, and everyone wins.
Players should be paid.
I'm not sure I understand. My biggest problem is that the value of education is so discounted when this topic is raised.
My second biggest problem is presumption that the individual players drive the income. In fact, it is the program - the brand itself - that drives the income.
But that is another discussion.
Suppose it is decided that college players should be paid.
Do we eliminate scholarships and require the player to pay tuition? No.
If not, does the walk-on player who gets no scholarship get paid? No.
What about the scholarship player who does not play/letter - should he get paid? Yes.
Should a spot player be paid the same amount as a star player? Yes.
Should there be a salary cap? No, but everyone in the P5 should decide so it’s 1 number for all scholarships.
Do all college athletes get paid? No. Just the ones that drive revenue (Basketball, but mostly Football)
It may have visceral appeal but the application would seem unworkable. Not at all.
I'm not sure I understand. My biggest problem is that the value of education is so discounted when this topic is raised.
My second biggest problem is presumption that the individual players drive the income. In fact, it is the program - the brand itself - that drives the income.
But that is another discussion.
Suppose it is decided that college players should be paid.
Do we eliminate scholarships and require the player to pay tuition?
If not, does the walk-on player who gets no scholarship get paid?
What about the scholarship player who does not play/letter - should he get paid?
Should a spot player be paid the same amount as a star player?
Should there be a salary cap?
Do all college athletes get paid?
It may have visceral appeal but the application would seem unworkable.