FBI arrests Assistant Basketball Coaches in Corruption Scheme

[Waltdods]

In a perfect world, you might have a point in some of these areas. In the real world, as you concede, it would be very difficult to recast all these systems. For example:

1. Pretty much impossible for Colleges to pay "market rate" for a few athletes and still fund T-IX programs on top of the cost to shelter, educate, train and coach all of them. Also, how do you separate each athlete's "value", and determine what part of the team's success is attributable to them and/or where on the developmental curve each athlete is performing at a given time?;
2. If all hospital volunteers were "paid" and residents fully compensated, this would change the hospital economic model;
3. NFP charities use volunteers extensively, from the Red Cross to Hospice care. Are all those volunteers underpaid "employees"?
4. University research laboratories use graduate assistants extensively but keep all the proceeds of their labors and intellectual discoveries. If each was paid for a piece of every patent and discovery, research would probably stop as we know it;
5. There are vastly underpaid "interns" in many segments of the economy. They work summers, or part-time, usually for free or minimum wage. On your model, every single business using interns would have to pay them as full-time employees even though they might not be fully educated or credentialed (see non CPA accountants or non-bar qualified law candidates).

In the college arena, the only (legitimate) funding source I can think of is sponsorships. Shoe companies could pay college athletes, but they'd have to put the money in trust and also get around the Sports Agency Law. That's probably going on now under the table. This would also require some major rule changes to work under the NCAA umbrella.

You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. Remove the rules that prohibit players from obtaining outside income and they'll get outside income.

I am not saying that everyone is entitled to be paid all the time. I am saying that people should not be prevented from obtaining the value of their work.

If an individual law firm, for example, wants to pay a law graduate less until she passes the bar, fine. If an individual business wants to provide a low-paid internship, fine. But every law firm in America can't agree not to pay non-barred attorneys. (They don't, incidentally. I was paid at the same right as a bared attorney both as a law student intern and directly out of law school before New York got around to credentialing me. Some other firms may have; I wouldn't have gone there.)

 

[maxxyz]

You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. Remove the rules that prohibit players from obtaining outside income and they'll get outside income.

I am not saying that everyone is entitled to be paid all the time. I am saying that people should not be prevented from obtaining the value of their work.

Unfortunately your idea would only work in a vacuum. Every rich Kentucky booster would pay $10k for a shirt of the freshman dujour. It would be even more lopsided than it is now.

 

[rocklloyd]

Bilas just landed in syracuse. I wonder if he is here to interview jimmy

 

[reedny]

You are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. Remove the rules that prohibit players from obtaining outside income and they'll get outside income.

I am not saying that everyone is entitled to be paid all the time. I am saying that people should not be prevented from obtaining the value of their work.

If an individual law firm, for example, wants to pay a law graduate less until she passes the bar, fine. If an individual business wants to provide a low-paid internship, fine. But every law firm in America can't agree not to pay non-barred attorneys. (They don't, incidentally. I was paid at the same right as a bared attorney both as a law student intern and directly out of law school before New York got around to credentialing me. Some other firms may have; I wouldn't have gone there.)

I think changes in just one of these areas would be complicated, let alone all of them. You can't just change the rules when a whole pile of stakeholders have pinned their education or their economic model on the current system (most scholarship athletes; the NCAA; most P5 schools; the NBA player's union and numerous multi-billion dollar companies, to name a few) ... to say nothing of the NYS Legislature (Sports Agency Law).

 

[Waltdods]

I think changes in just one of these areas would be complicated, let alone all of them. You don't just change the rules, because a whole bunch of stakeholders won't agree to that ... to say nothing of the NYS Legislature.

But this is a moving target. We started with a debate about whether the players are fairly compensated. We seem to be in agreeement that they aren't (the post just before yours says that if the rules were changed U.K. boosters would pay 10k for a shirt from a player). Now we are arguing whether it is practical for the players to receive compensation. On that, I think the actual legal impediments are much more surmountable than people want to think but that's also not the debate we started with.

People like the status quo. I get that. So do I, more or less. But we are here due to a weird set of contingencies that have the result of benefiting many people at the expense of many others. To defend it, you end up bouncing around from "value of education" to "if they don't like it they can go to Europe (or community college)" to "it's the law!" To "U.K. Boosters would abuse the system if it changed" (they do already of course) to "what about d-3 players"

 

[themorey]

Jim Larranaga admits he believes he is Coach -3 in FBI report.

Which means the FBI believes he knew about 150k arrangement to pay Nassir Little.

I would assume they can prove it...which makes Laranagga's denial a bit dicey.

He still claims he will be vindicated and he is happy none of his assistants were implicated. Does he think the NCAA is running this investigation? Or maybe he is just getting senile...

 

[reedny]

But this is a moving target. We started with a debate about whether the players are fairly compensated. We seem to be in agreeement that they aren't (the post just before yours says that if the rules were changed U.K. boosters would pay 10k for a shirt from a player). Now we are arguing whether it is practical for the players to receive compensation. On that, I think the actual legal impediments are much more surmountable than people want to think but that's also not the debate we started with.

People like the status quo. I get that. So do I, more or less. But we are here due to a weird set of contingencies that have the result of benefiting many people at the expense of many others. To defend it, you end up bouncing around from "value of education" to "if they don't like it they can go to Europe (or community college)" to "it's the law!" To "U.K. Boosters would abuse the system if it changed" (they do already of course) to "what about d-3 players"

I'm not bouncing around (you dragged in other people's posts). I did point out other consequences of your argument, but my point all along has been that pro-prospects have choices other than college. I also believe that, if they choose college, they should not be able to have their cake (free education, high-level coaching and training, media showcase for their skills, food and board, etc.) and eat it too (get paid on top of it all). The vast majority -- hundreds of thousands of non-pro-prospect scholarship athletes -- benefits handsomely from the current educational model. Their interests win out over the few might who not be able to "cash in" on their economic potential while they're amateurs.

 

[maxxyz]

But this is a moving target. We started with a debate about whether the players are fairly compensated. We seem to be in agreeement that they aren't (the post just before yours says that if the rules were changed U.K. boosters would pay 10k for a shirt from a player). Now we are arguing whether it is practical for the players to receive compensation. On that, I think the actual legal impediments are much more surmountable than people want to think but that's also not the debate we started with.

I don’t think we are in agreement. I think 97% of the players are very fairly compensated. You are suggesting that simple changes will make things better (“just let them get paid for there likeness”), but what would really be needed to accomplish that would be the removal of the NCAA and replacing it with a professional sports league. An enormous prospect.

I would be in favor of the athletes who can play in the NFL are allowed to play in the NFL. And that college sports go back to what it should be; amature athletics. Maybe not as exciting as it is now, but still containing what makes college sports great - rivalries, team play, and home advantage.

 

[Budley]

He

African American studies. Women's studies. Rhetorical studies. Those types of degrees?
Huge demand for that training in the work force.

referred to UNIVERSITYS, that leave NC Tech School out of the discussion.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Unfortunately your idea would only work in a vacuum. Every rich Kentucky booster would pay $10k for a shirt of the freshman dujour. It would be even more lopsided than it is now.

Limit roster size. Or, once a spot is taken, it's a 4 year spot. That spot can't be filled by another player for 4 years

 

[Sherman20]

Unfortunately your idea would only work in a vacuum. Every rich Kentucky booster would pay $10k for a shirt of the freshman dujour. It would be even more lopsided than it is now.

There would still be rules to level the playing field and foster competitive balance—just like in professional sports.

 

[maxxyz]

There would still be rules to level the playing field and foster competitive balance—just like in professional sports.

Like the ones we have now that work so well?

 

[RandygoCuse]

Unfortunately your idea would only work in a vacuum. Every rich Kentucky booster would pay $10k for a shirt of the freshman dujour. It would be even more lopsided than it is now.

I'm cool with this. Let the players do outside endorsements and the market will help determine where they go. And it doesn't cost the school anything. Yes, there would be winners and losers but I think there would be more parity than one or two schools getting everybody.

 

[maxxyz]

I'm cool with this. Let the players do outside endorsements and the market will help determine where they go. And it doesn't cost the school anything. Yes, there would be winners and losers but I think there would be more parity than one or two schools getting everybody.

It would price small market schools out of the top tier. Big state schools and Big city schools with more booster money would be the top tier, while colleges like SU would become the equivalent of D2 or D3. As a Syracuse fan, its not my first choice.

How about instead, you let the players who have the ability or desire to be a professional athlete go pro (regardless of age), and the rest stay amateur?

 

[Sherman20]

Like the ones we have now that work so well?

I’m talking about restrictions that have to do with fostering competitive balance and leveling the playing field for p5 schools. why do the rules of the professional sports leagues regarding salary caps and other restrictions seem to work just fine?

Boosters wouldn’t be paying the players. You’d want to keep boosters out of this. The players would be paid with all the conference TV and NCAA tourney money that’s flowing into these universities.

 

[reedny]

I'm cool with this. Let the players do outside endorsements and the market will help determine where they go. And it doesn't cost the school anything. Yes, there would be winners and losers but I think there would be more parity than one or two schools getting everybody.

Never work. Read JB’s article today in the PS. Players can’t keep amateur status and accept money from shoe companies. There’s cheating now but allowing this would make things worse.

 

[RandygoCuse]

Never work. Read JB’s article today in the PS. Players can’t keep amateur status and accept money from shoe companies. There’s cheating now but allowing this would make things worse.[/QUOTE

Agree on the amateur status - I think big changes are needed. As for @maxxyz 's post (I don't know how to quote two in one post, my apologies), I think one of the changes would be for to split division 1 . In my opinion, we need one division for most of the larger schools. And I'm all in favor of letting kids go to the NBA early. They can still develop in the G-League.

 

[shantydaze]

Indictments against the four Assistant coaches arrested (Link)

Who is going to talk first?

Richardson is facing charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, solicitation of bribes by an agent of a federally funded organization, conspiracy to commit honest services fraud, wire fraud conspiracy and travel act conspiracy. If convicted, Sean Miller’s longest-tenured assistant could serve as long as 60 years in prison and pay up to $1.5 million in fines.

. . . .

The time to return an indictment was extended for a month for two defendants: Sood and Brad Augustine, the AAU program director who stepped down. In late October, prosecutors said in court papers that it was continuing discussions with lawyers for Sood and Augustine to bring about a possible deal before indictment.

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[orange79]

He's begging to be fired, apparently.

 

[Alsacs]

He's begging to be fired, apparently.

Fired with cause as well.
Pearl is obviously playing the I am ignorant card.
Person was indicted yesterday so guy is in trouble.

 

[Frozen]

 

[PauliePeppas]

Soon Bruce, soon

 

[MSOrange]

Gosh Pearl is just one of those Eddie Haskell guys who plays Mr Nice Guy to the media but just doesn't care about any rules and thinks they don't apply to him. The show cause penalty is for guys like him.

 

[AZOrange]

Heh...that usually ends well...