Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Basketball
Topic:  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial

Topic:  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
Author
Message
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,688

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/11/2018 3:05:16 PM 
The TV revenues for the Power 5 are staggering. 30 years ago the playing field was somewhat level. Now it's not even close. The problem as I see it for us and MAC level schools is thinking that we can get there by just spending more money on coaches salaries, new scoreboards, etc. It's just throwing away money.
Back to Top
  
OU_Country
General User



Member Since: 12/6/2005
Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County
Post Count: 8,337

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/11/2018 3:58:54 PM 
giacomo wrote:
The TV revenues for the Power 5 are staggering. 30 years ago the playing field was somewhat level. Now it's not even close. The problem as I see it for us and MAC level schools is thinking that we can get there by just spending more money on coaches salaries, new scoreboards, etc. It's just throwing away money.


I'd say what Ohio is doing now is only enough to keep up with our mid-major peers, or be better than some of them - not to compete with the P5/P6/P7.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,433

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/11/2018 4:54:14 PM 
catfan28 wrote:

So, you're essentially siding with the "top 1%" (i.e. the big boys of college athletics and the most elite athletes).


I'm not "siding with the 1%." I'm advocating for unpaid labor to be fairly compensated and think it's un-American and anti-capitalist for athletic departments and coaches to get rich off of the labor of athletes while the athletes themselves have their earning potential limited by arcane rules.

Further, I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist that fans insist schools with successful athletic departments and athletes with exceptional skills must remain unpaid because of vague notions like "fan experience" and so fans can continue to delude themselves that the playing field's somehow level.

The Ohio University football team is not eligible for a national championship. They could go 13-0, and would still very likely not have the opportunity to play for the national championship. That's the level playing field people are fighting to protect.

catfan28 wrote:

I will proudly carry the flag for everyone else (G5, FCS, D2, D3, NAIA) doing things the right way. There are thousands of great student-athletes, students, fans and alumni of those schools that don't deserve to have their experience/opportunities diminished.


How does allowing NCAA athletes to accept endorsement money diminish the opportunities and experience of the thousands of great student-athletes, students, fans and alumni of G5, FCS, D2, D3, NAIA schools?

catfan28 wrote:

Those student-athletes with pro potential will go on to make more than what almost anyone on this planet can dream of. College athletics needs to remain a level playing field (or as much of one as is possible, given the current corruption of money at the P5 level).


How does allowing NCAA athletes to accept endorsement money alter the current landscape in any way?

catfan28 wrote:

College athletics is NOT (and shouldn't turn into) a for-profit business. The unintended consequences of such would be tremendous.

[/QUOTE]

How does allowing an individual athlete to accept endorsement money turn college athletics into a for profit business?

I'm making a super simple suggestion: let athletes accept endorsement money. That could be a Zion Williamson who will make tens of millions of dollars in the NBA getting a Nike shoe, or it could be Craig Krenzel appearing on a billboard for a Columbus car dealership.




Back to Top
  
catfan28
General User

Member Since: 6/11/2011
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,503

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/11/2018 11:32:41 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


I'm not "siding with the 1%." I'm advocating for unpaid labor to be fairly compensated and think it's un-American and anti-capitalist for athletic departments and coaches to get rich off of the labor of athletes while the athletes themselves have their earning potential limited by arcane rules.

Further, I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist that fans insist schools with successful athletic departments and athletes with exceptional skills must remain unpaid because of vague notions like "fan experience" and so fans can continue to delude themselves that the playing field's somehow level.



The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.

Creating some sort of free-for-all of endorsements opens Pandora's box for the entire system. As bad as the separation of the "haves" and "have nots" is now, it would get a whole lot worse when boosters get into a bidding war for athletes.

IMO, we should be working to get money OUT of college sports - not inject more into it. College athletes aren't "labor". Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store. If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc).

On top of that, in today's world where student debt saddles so many, a free ride to a major university is invaluable. I know many families where kids are saddled with $100,000 bills coming out of college. Tell them that a full ride scholarship is useless. It ruins their finances until they are in their 40's.
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,726

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 5:09:03 AM 
catfan28 wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


I'm not "siding with the 1%." I'm advocating for unpaid labor to be fairly compensated and think it's un-American and anti-capitalist for athletic departments and coaches to get rich off of the labor of athletes while the athletes themselves have their earning potential limited by arcane rules.

Further, I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist that fans insist schools with successful athletic departments and athletes with exceptional skills must remain unpaid because of vague notions like "fan experience" and so fans can continue to delude themselves that the playing field's somehow level.



The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.

Creating some sort of free-for-all of endorsements opens Pandora's box for the entire system. As bad as the separation of the "haves" and "have nots" is now, it would get a whole lot worse when boosters get into a bidding war for athletes.

IMO, we should be working to get money OUT of college sports - not inject more into it. College athletes aren't "labor". Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store. If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc).

On top of that, in today's world where student debt saddles so many, a free ride to a major university is invaluable. I know many families where kids are saddled with $100,000 bills coming out of college. Tell them that a full ride scholarship is useless. It ruins their finances until they are in their 40's.


+1

I clan see it now the Alabama Athletic Foundation just signs Forest Gump to a $1 Million dollar endorsement deal to promote the school or Sports Science at Alabama. The Ohio State Alumni Foundation just announced they will sign Andy Katzemoyer to a $2.5 Million dollar deal to indorse their new basket weaving program and serve as a Longaberger rep.

I said this on another thread that these rules exist because people have already cheated. Know why athletes were forbidden from working? Because boosters and departments themselves gave great sums of money for work not preformed. We’ve already been down this road and it did not end well. To accept a repacking of the same scams is to be ignorant of the human nature and their sports teams and fanaticism.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,433

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 11:59:03 AM 
catfan28 wrote:

The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.


I'm aware of the financial situation at most athletic departments, and didn't mean to imply that "everybody is getting rich off of the backs of athletes." In fact, whether or not somebody is getting rich at all is irrelevant, all that's relevant to my argument is that any money at all is being made, even if the money being made isn't enough to turn a profit.

I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist to limit an individual's ability to earn money. If an athlete at any level is famous enough that a private company feels it benefits them in whatever way to pay them for services, I'm fine with that. It doesn't matter to me whether that individual plays for a team in an athletic department that's completely broke, or if they're Zion Williamson. For me, it's a question of principle.

catfan28 wrote:

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.


Again, this is irrelevant to my point. Those 1,000 kids can continue to play the sport that they love. But the fact that nobody is interested in offering them an endorsement deal doesn't strike me as a reason to deny Zion Williamson the right to sign an endorsement deal.

catfan28 wrote:

Creating some sort of free-for-all of endorsements opens Pandora's box for the entire system.


Free-for-all and free market share a lot of characteristics. I'm pro free market in this case because it provides a solution to edge cases (i.e. Zion Williamson who is having his earning potential limited and taken advantage of) while protecting the amateurism of those who are actually amateurs.

And I don't doubt that this would be a shock to the system. The system needs shocking.

catfan28 wrote:

As bad as the separation of the "haves" and "have nots" is now, it would get a whole lot worse when boosters get into a bidding war for athletes.


I don't doubt this, either. I just don't really care nor am I convinced it would actually be a bad thing. In fact, I suspect the "have nots" would stand to gain quite a bit by distancing themselves from the haves and staking their commitment to amateurism. There's a segment of college athletics -- a small, but substantial segment -- that are basically semi-pro leagues many sports. I have no real moral issue treating them as such and allowing athletes at that level to accepts endorsement deals and otherwise earn money on their notoriety.

catfan28 wrote:

College athletes aren't "labor".


I disagree. And I think you do, too. Right? I mean, in another paragraph you start arguing that a college scholarship is invaluable and is sufficient compensation. If athletes aren't labor, why are they being compensated? All I'm arguing is that the form of that compensation shouldn't be limited.

catfan28 wrote:

Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store.


Yes, that's one type of student athlete. There's another type, too. That one exists doesn't negate the other's right to earn money based on their talents.

catfan28 wrote:

If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc).


There is no minor league in football and the NFL has a strict age limit. The NBA also has an age limit. NCAA basketball provides far more publicity and a far larger stage than European leagues or the G-League.

catfan28 wrote:

On top of that, in today's world where student debt saddles so many, a free ride to a major university is invaluable.


I never stated that scholarships don't carry value. I just think that players should have the freedom to earn beyond a scholarship if the opportunity presents itself.

A student on an academic scholarship wouldn't be prohibited from working a side job. I see on reason why it should be different for an athlete.

catfan28 wrote:

I know many families where kids are saddled with $100,000 bills coming out of college. Tell them that a full ride scholarship is useless. It ruins their finances until they are in their 40's.


Again, you're arguing with somebody other than me. I never said a full-ride is useless. I just don't think it should be the only form of compensation available.

Last Edited: 10/12/2018 12:09:45 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,433

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 11:59:53 AM 
catfan28 wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


I'm not "siding with the 1%." I'm advocating for unpaid labor to be fairly compensated and think it's un-American and anti-capitalist for athletic departments and coaches to get rich off of the labor of athletes while the athletes themselves have their earning potential limited by arcane rules.

Further, I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist that fans insist schools with successful athletic departments and athletes with exceptional skills must remain unpaid because of vague notions like "fan experience" and so fans can continue to delude themselves that the playing field's somehow level.



The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.

Creating some sort of free-for-all of endorsements opens Pandora's box for the entire system. As bad as the separation of the "haves" and "have nots" is now, it would get a whole lot worse when boosters get into a bidding war for athletes.

IMO, we should be working to get money OUT of college sports - not inject more into it. College athletes aren't "labor". Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store. If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc).

On top of that, in today's world where student debt saddles so many, a free ride to a major university is invaluable. I know many families where kids are saddled with $100,000 bills coming out of college. Tell them that a full ride scholarship is useless. It ruins their finances until they are in their 40's.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,433

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 12:02:15 PM 
BillyTheCat wrote:
catfan28 wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:


I'm not "siding with the 1%." I'm advocating for unpaid labor to be fairly compensated and think it's un-American and anti-capitalist for athletic departments and coaches to get rich off of the labor of athletes while the athletes themselves have their earning potential limited by arcane rules.

Further, I think it's un-American and anti-capitalist that fans insist schools with successful athletic departments and athletes with exceptional skills must remain unpaid because of vague notions like "fan experience" and so fans can continue to delude themselves that the playing field's somehow level.



The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.

Creating some sort of free-for-all of endorsements opens Pandora's box for the entire system. As bad as the separation of the "haves" and "have nots" is now, it would get a whole lot worse when boosters get into a bidding war for athletes.

IMO, we should be working to get money OUT of college sports - not inject more into it. College athletes aren't "labor". Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store. If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc).

On top of that, in today's world where student debt saddles so many, a free ride to a major university is invaluable. I know many families where kids are saddled with $100,000 bills coming out of college. Tell them that a full ride scholarship is useless. It ruins their finances until they are in their 40's.


+1

I clan see it now the Alabama Athletic Foundation just signs Forest Gump to a $1 Million dollar endorsement deal to promote the school or Sports Science at Alabama. The Ohio State Alumni Foundation just announced they will sign Andy Katzemoyer to a $2.5 Million dollar deal to indorse their new basket weaving program and serve as a Longaberger rep.

I said this on another thread that these rules exist because people have already cheated. Know why athletes were forbidden from working? Because boosters and departments themselves gave great sums of money for work not preformed. We’ve already been down this road and it did not end well. To accept a repacking of the same scams is to be ignorant of the human nature and their sports teams and fanaticism.


These rules exist because previous rules deemed that sort of behavior to be cheating. If you lifted restrictions on athletes ability to be compensated beyond their scholarships, that behavior is no longer cheating. It's just employment.

Personally, it doesn't bother me if a private company wants to pay an athlete. I'm not sure why it bothers others so much.

Last Edited: 10/12/2018 12:11:57 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,077

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 1:15:03 PM 
catfan28 wrote:
. . . IMO, we should be working to get money OUT of college sports - not inject more into it. College athletes aren't "labor". Talk to some of our talented student-athletes sometime. They play because they want to, not because they sold their soul to the company store. If you're just in it for the money, there are plenty of opportunities to play (overseas, minor leagues, etc). . . .


+1

In fact, I'll go a step further, I think the NCAA should enact a salary cap on coaches. As BTC points out, it's a voluntary association, so if Ohio A&M still wants to pay Meyer $7.5 million a year (or whatever it is) they can just leave the NCAA. We might have six of seven schools do that, and the rest of the college football world can get back to playing something resembling amateur college athletics.

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
mf279801
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Newark, DE
Post Count: 2,461

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 2:28:49 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:


In fact, I'll go a step further, I think the NCAA should enact a salary cap on coaches. As BTC points out, it's a voluntary association, so if Ohio A&M still wants to pay Meyer $7.5 million a year (or whatever it is) they can just leave the NCAA. We might have six of seven schools do that, and the rest of the college football world can get back to playing something resembling amateur college athletics.



The NCAA tried that. It was struck down as an illegal cartel and a Sherman act violation
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2012/12/19/why-a...
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,077

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/12/2018 3:08:33 PM 
mf279801 wrote:
OhioCatFan wrote:


In fact, I'll go a step further, I think the NCAA should enact a salary cap on coaches. As BTC points out, it's a voluntary association, so if Ohio A&M still wants to pay Meyer $7.5 million a year (or whatever it is) they can just leave the NCAA. We might have six of seven schools do that, and the rest of the college football world can get back to playing something resembling amateur college athletics.



The NCAA tried that. It was struck down as an illegal cartel and a Sherman act violation
https://www.forbes.com/sites/marcedelman/2012/12/19/why-a...


Interesting. However, I wonder if the courts would look differently on a situation where you are not capping the salaries of coaches on the low end of the spectrum but those on the high end. I understand that the principles could be viewed as the same, but I've seen situations in which courts didn't necessarily apply the same standard in cases with vastly different specifics. [Those damn Sherman brothers: one destroys southern railroads, the other destroys railroad cartels!]

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,688

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/15/2018 6:24:11 PM 
The total cost to attend Michigan is around 30k per year. Harbaugh makes 9M. It doesn't add up and will have to change in the future. You can't call it an amateur endeavor with those kinds of revenues and salaries.
Back to Top
  
Buckeye to Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 9/10/2013
Post Count: 1,776

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/15/2018 9:54:01 PM 
Regardless Bill Self is screwed
Back to Top
  
GroverBall
General User

Member Since: 12/3/2012
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,244

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/15/2018 10:16:15 PM 
giacomo wrote:
The total cost to attend Michigan is around 30k per year. Harbaugh makes 9M. It doesn't add up and will have to change in the future. You can't call it an amateur endeavor with those kinds of revenues and salaries.


Well that's for in-state. Out-of-State is double that.
Back to Top
  
Maddog13
General User

Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Post Count: 689

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/16/2018 8:33:27 AM 
From what I can see, read, and hear, this whole trial is kind of in the category of "who gives a damn?" Until there is a Congressional hearing similar to what transpired over Steroids in Major League Baseball years ago, it just seems like it is going to end up being business as usual for NCAA basketball. Oh, yeah, there will be some scapegoats I am sure, but the whole entertainment/sports/money machine keeps on rolling. After all, I guess that it is true that it is "not cheating until one gets caught." I think that even when one does get caught, the consequences are relatively insignificant.

As for Capitalism, it is very simple: profit good, loss bad. For some, the end always justifies the means. What makes me curious is whether the backers of all of this are truly getting rewards from their investments? So many of these young blue chip players will ultimately disappear into the lost history pages of sports mediocrity, which is probably why you get what you can when you can. The real question is who ultimately benefits, and from what I can see none of those people are anywhere near this trial, including the Head of the NCAA.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,545

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/16/2018 9:05:17 AM 
Maddog13 wrote:

What makes me curious is whether the backers of all of this are truly getting rewards from their investments? So many of these young blue chip players will ultimately disappear into the lost history pages of sports mediocrity, which is probably why you get what you can when you can. The real question is who ultimately benefits, and from what I can see none of those people are anywhere near this trial, including the Head of the NCAA.


Going back to HBO's "Student Athlete" documentary again,it seems that shoe companies make a lot of money from sales by having players,as far down as high school,being associated with a "brand".

That's why they work so hard to "lock in" players at a young age.


Last Edited: 10/16/2018 9:05:41 AM by rpbobcat
Back to Top
  
Mark Lembright '85
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Highland Heights, OH
Post Count: 2,447

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/16/2018 9:32:54 AM 
GroverBall wrote:
giacomo wrote:
The total cost to attend Michigan is around 30k per year. Harbaugh makes 9M. It doesn't add up and will have to change in the future. You can't call it an amateur endeavor with those kinds of revenues and salaries.


Well that's for in-state. Out-of-State is double that.


GOT THAT RIGHT!!!!
Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,688

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/19/2018 6:18:46 PM 
From Bloomberg today:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-10-19/nba-g-...

The G league will pay players 125k.
Back to Top
  
Buckeye to Bobcat
General User

Member Since: 9/10/2013
Post Count: 1,776

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/19/2018 7:36:52 PM 
rpbobcat wrote:
Maddog13 wrote:

What makes me curious is whether the backers of all of this are truly getting rewards from their investments? So many of these young blue chip players will ultimately disappear into the lost history pages of sports mediocrity, which is probably why you get what you can when you can. The real question is who ultimately benefits, and from what I can see none of those people are anywhere near this trial, including the Head of the NCAA.


Going back to HBO's "Student Athlete" documentary again,it seems that shoe companies make a lot of money from sales by having players,as far down as high school,being associated with a "brand".

That's why they work so hard to "lock in" players at a young age.




The fact that LeBron is talking about the corruption of the NCAA is highly hypocritical, especially considering that he took a hummer in high school.....
Back to Top
  
GroverBall
General User

Member Since: 12/3/2012
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,244

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/19/2018 10:43:34 PM 
Buckeye to Bobcat wrote:
rpbobcat wrote:
Maddog13 wrote:

What makes me curious is whether the backers of all of this are truly getting rewards from their investments? So many of these young blue chip players will ultimately disappear into the lost history pages of sports mediocrity, which is probably why you get what you can when you can. The real question is who ultimately benefits, and from what I can see none of those people are anywhere near this trial, including the Head of the NCAA.


Going back to HBO's "Student Athlete" documentary again,it seems that shoe companies make a lot of money from sales by having players,as far down as high school,being associated with a "brand".

That's why they work so hard to "lock in" players at a young age.




The fact that LeBron is talking about the corruption of the NCAA is highly hypocritical, especially considering that he took a hummer in high school.....


Fake News. Old Fake News but still Fake News.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,545

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/25/2018 6:53:43 AM 
All of the defendants in the trial got convicted.

According to what I've read,the defense team was so confident,they didn't even put on witnesses.

The press is saying that anyone with any familiarity with college basketball, or the NBA, knew the case was really a "stretch",especially that the defendants' actions "harmed" universities .

Problem for the defendants,they found jurors who weren't familiar with BB.

Now you have a couple of issues.

1.Do these guys rat out others to try to reduce their sentences ?

2.Does this put pressure on the coaches scheduled to go on trial early next year to try to get a plea deal,including cooperating ?
Back to Top
  
catfan28
General User

Member Since: 6/11/2011
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 1,503

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/25/2018 9:09:37 AM 
rpbobcat wrote:
All of the defendants in the trial got convicted.

According to what I've read,the defense team was so confident,they didn't even put on witnesses.

The press is saying that anyone with any familiarity with college basketball, or the NBA, knew the case was really a "stretch",especially that the defendants' actions "harmed" universities .

Problem for the defendants,they found jurors who weren't familiar with BB.

Now you have a couple of issues.

1.Do these guys rat out others to try to reduce their sentences ?

2.Does this put pressure on the coaches scheduled to go on trial early next year to try to get a plea deal,including cooperating ?



Although the behavior was completely unethical, the fact that anyone is facing jail time over the game of basketball is ridiculous.

The NCAA should have dealt with schools/programs and individuals responsible here. Involving the legal system, to me at least, seems like taking dynamite to an ant hill.
Back to Top
  
rpbobcat
General User

Member Since: 4/28/2006
Location: Rochelle Park, NJ
Post Count: 3,545

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/25/2018 9:46:53 AM 
catfan28 wrote:


Although the behavior was completely unethical, the fact that anyone is facing jail time over the game of basketball is ridiculous.

The NCAA should have dealt with schools/programs and individuals responsible here. Involving the legal system, to me at least, seems like taking dynamite to an ant hill.


One of the stories I read this morning said that the NCAA may use these convictions as a "hammer" come down on certain programs.

Personally,given their history,I'll believe it when I see it.
Back to Top
  
OhioStunter
General User



Member Since: 2/18/2005
Location: Chicago
Post Count: 2,516

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/25/2018 10:12:03 AM 
catfan28 wrote:

The notion that everyone is getting rich on the backs of athletes is such a fallacy created by TV talking heads. There are MAYBE 15-20 schools that actually make money off of college sports. And anyone who does make money, it's barely above break-even levels.

Why? Because much of the revenue brought in by football and men's basketball (even at the O$U and Alabama's of the world) goes to fund expenses for sports like women's soccer and track. For every Zion Williamson, there are 1,000 other kids that would do anything just to play the sport they love. That's one of the things I enjoy most about college athletics.



The latest TV deal for March Madness brings in $8.8 BILLION to the NCAA.

The latest TV deal for CFB Playoffs brings in $5.6 BILLION.

Who is not getting rich off the backs of athletes?
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,726

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: OT: Adidas Federal Trial
   Posted: 10/25/2018 10:18:03 AM 
catfan28 wrote:
rpbobcat wrote:
All of the defendants in the trial got convicted.

According to what I've read,the defense team was so confident,they didn't even put on witnesses.

The press is saying that anyone with any familiarity with college basketball, or the NBA, knew the case was really a "stretch",especially that the defendants' actions "harmed" universities .

Problem for the defendants,they found jurors who weren't familiar with BB.

Now you have a couple of issues.

1.Do these guys rat out others to try to reduce their sentences ?

2.Does this put pressure on the coaches scheduled to go on trial early next year to try to get a plea deal,including cooperating ?



Although the behavior was completely unethical, the fact that anyone is facing jail time over the game of basketball is ridiculous.

The NCAA should have dealt with schools/programs and individuals responsible here. Involving the legal system, to me at least, seems like taking dynamite to an ant hill.


This is NOT the NCAA doing this, this is federal racketeering charges. Not sure why so many people are trying to pan the NCAA on this issue. These people are in violation of federal law. And these folks are not facing jail time over a game of basketball, they are facing jail time for their actions.
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 50  of 78 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2 | 3 | 4    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 309 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
307 Guests
2 Registered Users:
 M.D.W.S.T, Ryan Carey
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties