Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis

Topic:  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
Author
Message
mid70sbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 576

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/19/2023 11:27:46 PM 
L.C. wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.

In addition to scholarships, I worked at a copy/print shop to pay my expenses, or at other times, as a TA. The problem with football, for a student, is that it requires a massive time commitment that leaves little time for other things, such as studying, working jobs, etc. I think that rules prohibit them from part time jobs during season, but even if they don't, they clearly can't work as many hours as most other students. I've always viewed the benefits they receive (scholarships, room & board, academic tutoring) as appropriate, given the time they have to spend on football.

The problem is, that they are a one size fits all solution. Everyone gets the same thing (at least, in theory), so it's socialism in action. Take from each according to their ability, and give to each according to their needs. On the positive side, it was a massively successful program for affirmative action, which gave many people a college education whose families had never before had such an opportunity, and many people took advantage of that to leave poverty behind and move into financially lucrative careers. On the negative side, it created corruption, where people used money under the table to recruit the true stars.

Can the new NIL system maintain the positives of the past, but also avoid the corruption of the past, and result in a fairer system, and without destroying the entire system by further increasing the differences between the "have" schools and the "have not" schools? We shall see. Life is an adventure. Things change. Often when old problems are fixed, new ones emerge, but that's no excuse for avoiding attempts to progress.


But when you look at college athletes on scholarship, you see guys majoring in disciplines from Chemical Engineering to Business to Sports Administration to Physical Education and some lesser majors that may not be very financially viable post-graduation. All kids are different. I've volunteered with kids close to 20 years now, many high poverty, so I see the financial side. NIL is not the answer for schools like Ohio and most MAC schools. Kids excelling on the field or court will move on, in part due to greed. A paid for college education, and possibly even a paid for graduate degree, apparently isn't enough. We're a "have not" school and corruption is inevitible IMO.
Back to Top
  
mid70sbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 576

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/19/2023 11:32:29 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
colobobcat66 wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
M.D.W.S.T wrote:
Good for him, and potentially OU in total, but I'm really curious how something like this plays out? I've seen it at a couple other schools.

Is Kurtis going to be appearing in marketing in south Florida real estate? He going to be selling apartments on the side? or is it just a way to funnel money to athletes?


Simply funneling money to athletes.



Thatís apparently whatís itís all about. Folks asked for it so now they have it. Hope everybody is happy now.


Question for you: why are you unhappy about this?

In what way does Beau Blankenship and Kurtis Roarke's financial relationship impact you? Everybody keeps saying things like "Hope everybody is happy now" as if this is some obviously bad thing; was the prior world, where Beau Blankenship's money had to be funneled through the university and ended up as a hydrotherapy pool better in some meaningful way?

Why is the outcome of money going directly to a talented, hardworking kid worse? I don't understand the morality at play here. How has people earning money come to be interpreted by so many people as inherently bad?


So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.


It's not clear to me how this addresses the post is in response to.


Not surprised you didn't comprehend. But just to give you a second chance athletes earning money versus "being given" money is a bit different. Just replying to what YOU posted.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 4:23:44 AM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
colobobcat66 wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
M.D.W.S.T wrote:
Good for him, and potentially OU in total, but I'm really curious how something like this plays out? I've seen it at a couple other schools.

Is Kurtis going to be appearing in marketing in south Florida real estate? He going to be selling apartments on the side? or is it just a way to funnel money to athletes?


Simply funneling money to athletes.



Thatís apparently whatís itís all about. Folks asked for it so now they have it. Hope everybody is happy now.


Question for you: why are you unhappy about this?

In what way does Beau Blankenship and Kurtis Roarke's financial relationship impact you? Everybody keeps saying things like "Hope everybody is happy now" as if this is some obviously bad thing; was the prior world, where Beau Blankenship's money had to be funneled through the university and ended up as a hydrotherapy pool better in some meaningful way?

Why is the outcome of money going directly to a talented, hardworking kid worse? I don't understand the morality at play here. How has people earning money come to be interpreted by so many people as inherently bad?


So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.


It's not clear to me how this addresses the post is in response to.


Not surprised you didn't comprehend. But just to give you a second chance athletes earning money versus "being given" money is a bit different. Just replying to what YOU posted.


Why so snippy, man? But thanks so much for the second chance.

So you are upset because Kurtis Rourke doesn't work hard enough for your tastes? I didn't realize he was such a natural talent. I assumed he must have worked pretty hard to get where he is and continues to work hard at something that both the University and Alumni value quite a bit.

Out of curiosity, are there other cases where you're opposed to the free market and think individuals should have capped compensation and shouldn't have the right to earn more if it's available to them?

My view here is pretty simple. Kurtis Rourke's bank account isn't my business.

Your view is less clear to me. You seem to think that he 1) should consider scholarship money enough, but 2) acknowledge that it's not enough and players might need more, but 3) they should only get more through jobs that you approve of, like bagging groceries.

I guess going forward OU athletes should text you or something so you can chime in on their income streams and make sure they meet your standard? And do you want Beau Blankenship to text the same number so you can sign off on what he chooses to do with his own money? Or do you want to set up a different line for non-athletes?






Last Edited: 1/20/2023 4:48:26 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
bobcatsquared
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 4,385

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 6:35:18 AM 
BLSS not sure why so many of his fellow BA posters are "snippy" with him.

Last Edited: 1/20/2023 6:35:31 AM by bobcatsquared

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 7:23:37 AM 
bobcatsquared wrote:
BLSS not sure why so many of his fellow BA posters are "snippy" with him.


Yep, I'm completely oblivious and that was an honest question that I'm really trying to get to the bottom of, as evidenced by the rest of the post.

Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 9,680

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 4:44:37 PM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
But when you look at college athletes on scholarship, you see guys majoring in disciplines from Chemical Engineering to Business to Sports Administration to Physical Education and some lesser majors that may not be very financially viable post-graduation. All kids are different. I've volunteered with kids close to 20 years now, many high poverty, so I see the financial side. NIL is not the answer for schools like Ohio and most MAC schools. Kids excelling on the field or court will move on, in part due to greed. A paid for college education, and possibly even a paid for graduate degree, apparently isn't enough. We're a "have not" school and corruption is inevitible IMO.

As I have said, the current system has been a very effective affirmative action program. No, it's not even. Some benefit from it, and some don't. Some choose engineering, and some choose PE. Some become doctors or dentists. Some, after being in the public eye, go on to careers in politics or sales. Others do little.

Thus, it's been an effective program, but not perfect. Will giving them money instead of an education benefit them more? That's not a relevant question, sorry. A new system is coming, where they get money instead of an education. Will they be happier? Will the benefit more in the short run? In the long run? We'll have to see.


ďWe have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.Ē ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 6:08:56 PM 
L.C. wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
But when you look at college athletes on scholarship, you see guys majoring in disciplines from Chemical Engineering to Business to Sports Administration to Physical Education and some lesser majors that may not be very financially viable post-graduation. All kids are different. I've volunteered with kids close to 20 years now, many high poverty, so I see the financial side. NIL is not the answer for schools like Ohio and most MAC schools. Kids excelling on the field or court will move on, in part due to greed. A paid for college education, and possibly even a paid for graduate degree, apparently isn't enough. We're a "have not" school and corruption is inevitible IMO.

As I have said, the current system has been a very effective affirmative action program. No, it's not even. Some benefit from it, and some don't. Some choose engineering, and some choose PE. Some become doctors or dentists. Some, after being in the public eye, go on to careers in politics or sales. Others do little.

Thus, it's been an effective program, but not perfect. Will giving them money instead of an education benefit them more? That's not a relevant question, sorry. A new system is coming, where they get money instead of an education. Will they be happier? Will the benefit more in the short run? In the long run? We'll have to see.


Largely agree, but two things:

1) Is it necessarily true that the system coming is money at the expense of education? I don't think so. The education is still there if they want it. I think one could also easily make the case that athletes earning money would make them more likely to finish their degrees. Money is a good thing for people to have, and financial security basically always correlates with higher rates of attaining degrees. For instance, data from Universal Basic Income studies show that both school attendance and completion increase substantially with UBI. Not sure why this population would lead to different results.

2) There's an option available to the "have nots" that nobody seems interested in for some reason. But there are entire divisions of college athletics where true amateur athletes are in school for an education and also happen to play sports. And the NIL and transfer portal haven't had nearly the impact at that level. From my perspective, the obvious answer for the "have nots" is to drop down, embrace amateurism, and stop trying to compete with the schools they never actually competed with to begin with. We can have our cake, or we can eat it.

Last Edited: 1/20/2023 6:19:46 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: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/20/2023 6:13:47 PM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
We're a "have not" school and corruption is inevitible IMO.


I don't follow on the corruption. The NIL makes it possible to legally and above board pay players. What incentive exists to subvert the very loose rules of the NIL and veer into corruption?

In fact, the system you are defending was rife with corruption and people went to jail. How do you envision the NIL becoming corrupt given how free and open the market is?
Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,356

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/21/2023 8:18:23 AM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
colobobcat66 wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
M.D.W.S.T wrote:
Good for him, and potentially OU in total, but I'm really curious how something like this plays out? I've seen it at a couple other schools.

Is Kurtis going to be appearing in marketing in south Florida real estate? He going to be selling apartments on the side? or is it just a way to funnel money to athletes?


Simply funneling money to athletes.



Thatís apparently whatís itís all about. Folks asked for it so now they have it. Hope everybody is happy now.


Question for you: why are you unhappy about this?

In what way does Beau Blankenship and Kurtis Roarke's financial relationship impact you? Everybody keeps saying things like "Hope everybody is happy now" as if this is some obviously bad thing; was the prior world, where Beau Blankenship's money had to be funneled through the university and ended up as a hydrotherapy pool better in some meaningful way?

Why is the outcome of money going directly to a talented, hardworking kid worse? I don't understand the morality at play here. How has people earning money come to be interpreted by so many people as inherently bad?


So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.


Itís enough when the coach is being paid in line with other faculty. Itís not when the coach is making millions. The old way is over. The coaching salaries brought this on.
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 9,680

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/21/2023 8:36:52 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
1) Is it necessarily true that the system coming is money at the expense of education? I don't think so....

Only a very, very small percentage of college athletes go to a school that could afford, and play a sport that can afford, to give both scholarships and pay. For the rest (G5, FCS, Division II, Division 3, NAIA) the money just isn't there. If they have to pay the athletes, something else has to give, and I see no other choice but the scholarship money. Cut coaches pay? While the potential savings would be greater at top schools, when you get down to G5 or lower, the potential savings are pretty insignificant. Suppose you cut Albin (and every other school cut their coaches). You might save $250k. Eliminate the scholarship and room and board, you might save $3-4 million.

That would give you a big enough pool that you can pay a lot of players $25k, and a few people a lot more. But, then how are they going to be connected to the University? If they aren't given scholarships, will they be enrolled? Maybe the future is the past. Once upon a time, teams were affiliated with businesses, rather than Universities. Originally, the team members were employees, but businesses would recruit "ringers" to make their teams better.

There are lots of ways this system can evolve. One thing we know is that things won't stay the same, and perhaps they shouldn't. Some teams could evolve away from Universities and become businesses on their own, while other teams could evolve back to club sports levels. Of one thing I'm certain, and that is that it's not reasonable to pay the players, and to get the money by saddling the general student population with fees and/or tuition increases.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
We can have our cake, or we can eat it.

Last Edited: 1/21/2023 11:02:55 AM by L.C.


ďWe have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.Ē ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,356

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/21/2023 6:50:43 PM 
The P5 can pay, at least the top half of the P5. The MAC canít and wonít. There will likely be a split in divisions. It was bound to happen with the exorbitant coaches salaries. The players want theirs and why shouldnít they get it?
Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 9,680

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 7:45:47 AM 
giacomo wrote:
The P5 can pay, at least the top half of the P5. The MAC canít and wonít. There will likely be a split in divisions. It was bound to happen with the exorbitant coaches salaries. The players want theirs and why shouldnít they get it?

I will turn around and ask you, why should there even be football associated with universities? Why shouldn't universities spin off their programs, with the strongest programs turning into a minor league, while the weaker ones cease to exist at all, or become club teams? With a farm system, we can have a free market, and players can earn what they are "worth" and coaches can be paid what they are "worth". It seems pointless to argue which group is getting too much and which group is getting too little, until there is a free market.

As a comparison, let's look at baseball. According to this article, the average salaries are:
Rookie league $4800 /yr
Single-A $6000 /yr
Double-A $9350 /yr
Triple-A $15,000 /yr

https://fanbuzz.com/mlb/minor-league-baseball-salary /

That kind of puts the $36,000 tuition plus room and board that college players get in perspective, doesn't it?


ďWe have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.Ē ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,356

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 8:18:23 AM 
I donít disagree with you. More change is coming and your scenario may play out. If coaches were paid in line with other faculty, at least within reason, this wouldnít be happening.
Back to Top
  
mid70sbobcat
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 576

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 8:53:39 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
colobobcat66 wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
M.D.W.S.T wrote:
Good for him, and potentially OU in total, but I'm really curious how something like this plays out? I've seen it at a couple other schools.

Is Kurtis going to be appearing in marketing in south Florida real estate? He going to be selling apartments on the side? or is it just a way to funnel money to athletes?


Simply funneling money to athletes.



Thatís apparently whatís itís all about. Folks asked for it so now they have it. Hope everybody is happy now.


Question for you: why are you unhappy about this?

In what way does Beau Blankenship and Kurtis Roarke's financial relationship impact you? Everybody keeps saying things like "Hope everybody is happy now" as if this is some obviously bad thing; was the prior world, where Beau Blankenship's money had to be funneled through the university and ended up as a hydrotherapy pool better in some meaningful way?

Why is the outcome of money going directly to a talented, hardworking kid worse? I don't understand the morality at play here. How has people earning money come to be interpreted by so many people as inherently bad?


So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.


It's not clear to me how this addresses the post is in response to.


Not surprised you didn't comprehend. But just to give you a second chance athletes earning money versus "being given" money is a bit different. Just replying to what YOU posted.


Why so snippy, man? But thanks so much for the second chance.

So you are upset because Kurtis Rourke doesn't work hard enough for your tastes? I didn't realize he was such a natural talent. I assumed he must have worked pretty hard to get where he is and continues to work hard at something that both the University and Alumni value quite a bit.

Out of curiosity, are there other cases where you're opposed to the free market and think individuals should have capped compensation and shouldn't have the right to earn more if it's available to them?

My view here is pretty simple. Kurtis Rourke's bank account isn't my business.

Your view is less clear to me. You seem to think that he 1) should consider scholarship money enough, but 2) acknowledge that it's not enough and players might need more, but 3) they should only get more through jobs that you approve of, like bagging groceries.

I guess going forward OU athletes should text you or something so you can chime in on their income streams and make sure they meet your standard? And do you want Beau Blankenship to text the same number so you can sign off on what he chooses to do with his own money? Or do you want to set up a different line for non-athletes?









I'm not "snippy". Just replied to what you had said and wonder why you apparently did NOT understand it.

Did I say ANYTHING about how hard Kurtis works? NO, I did not.

Your last paragraph makes you sound like an immature and childish person. Surprised you didn't edit post so as to look like you had some intelligence.

Last Edited: 1/22/2023 9:00:17 AM by mid70sbobcat

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 9:14:53 AM 
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
mid70sbobcat wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
colobobcat66 wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
M.D.W.S.T wrote:
Good for him, and potentially OU in total, but I'm really curious how something like this plays out? I've seen it at a couple other schools.

Is Kurtis going to be appearing in marketing in south Florida real estate? He going to be selling apartments on the side? or is it just a way to funnel money to athletes?


Simply funneling money to athletes.



Thatís apparently whatís itís all about. Folks asked for it so now they have it. Hope everybody is happy now.


Question for you: why are you unhappy about this?

In what way does Beau Blankenship and Kurtis Roarke's financial relationship impact you? Everybody keeps saying things like "Hope everybody is happy now" as if this is some obviously bad thing; was the prior world, where Beau Blankenship's money had to be funneled through the university and ended up as a hydrotherapy pool better in some meaningful way?

Why is the outcome of money going directly to a talented, hardworking kid worse? I don't understand the morality at play here. How has people earning money come to be interpreted by so many people as inherently bad?


So, athletes getting 5 years at Ohio, at say $30K a year in education, $150K isn't enough? Really?

The portal and NIL is destroying sports at the intercollegiate level.

I recall Daz Patterson, on full scholarship, bagging groceries in Athens.

What's next, college football becomes "professional"? Oh wait, it already is.


It's not clear to me how this addresses the post is in response to.


Not surprised you didn't comprehend. But just to give you a second chance athletes earning money versus "being given" money is a bit different. Just replying to what YOU posted.


Why so snippy, man? But thanks so much for the second chance.

So you are upset because Kurtis Rourke doesn't work hard enough for your tastes? I didn't realize he was such a natural talent. I assumed he must have worked pretty hard to get where he is and continues to work hard at something that both the University and Alumni value quite a bit.

Out of curiosity, are there other cases where you're opposed to the free market and think individuals should have capped compensation and shouldn't have the right to earn more if it's available to them?

My view here is pretty simple. Kurtis Rourke's bank account isn't my business.

Your view is less clear to me. You seem to think that he 1) should consider scholarship money enough, but 2) acknowledge that it's not enough and players might need more, but 3) they should only get more through jobs that you approve of, like bagging groceries.

I guess going forward OU athletes should text you or something so you can chime in on their income streams and make sure they meet your standard? And do you want Beau Blankenship to text the same number so you can sign off on what he chooses to do with his own money? Or do you want to set up a different line for non-athletes?









I'm not "snippy". Just replied to what you had said and wonder why you apparently did NOT understand it.

Did I say ANYTHING about how hard Kurtis works? NO, I did not.

Your last paragraph makes you sound like an immature and childish person. Surprised you didn't edit post so as to look like you had some intelligence.


A lot of interesting caps locks here for someone accusing others of being childish.

You feel Kurtis didn't earn the money and was just given it. And seemed to think it was better that someone previously bagged groceries for extra money.

If you're not trying to imply something about working for money by saying players need to earn money rather than being given money, I'm not sure what point you're making.

And I'm really sorry explaining it to me makes you so upset. If you're this upset about having to explain it a second time, it must be really, really rational and clear. Sorry I'm missing it.

Last Edited: 1/22/2023 9:17:13 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame

Back to Top
  
L.C.
General User

Member Since: 8/31/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 9,680

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 10:36:47 AM 
giacomo wrote:
I donít disagree with you. More change is coming and your scenario may play out. If coaches were paid in line with other faculty, at least within reason, this wouldnít be happening.

I don't really have a scenario. I wasn't implying that football players will only make $9000 a year; I was only pointing out that when the market sets the price, there is no way to know what the price will be. It could be $9,000, it could be $60,000. Time alone will tell.

I do know that, at least at the P5 level, there is a lot of money in the sport. It's not as much as at the NFL level, but it is enough that what is now "College Football" will survive in some form. What that form may be, I have no idea. I also know that there is no logical reason why football is tied to Universities, any more than it was logical for professional football to be tied to businesses. The NFL separated from the businesses that originally sponsored them, and it is not impossible that College Football may end up doing the same.

Change is coming. The situation reminds me of this from "Bartholomew and the Oobleck"
Doctor_Suess wrote:

Wonít look like rain. Wonít look like snow. Wonít look like fog. Thatís all we know. We just canít tell you any more. Weíve never made oobleck before.

Last Edited: 1/22/2023 10:40:38 AM by L.C.


ďWe have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.Ē ― Epictetus

Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 10:52:54 AM 
L.C. wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
1) Is it necessarily true that the system coming is money at the expense of education? I don't think so....

Only a very, very small percentage of college athletes go to a school that could afford, and play a sport that can afford, to give both scholarships and pay. For the rest (G5, FCS, Division II, Division 3, NAIA) the money just isn't there. If they have to pay the athletes, something else has to give, and I see no other choice but the scholarship money. Cut coaches pay? While the potential savings would be greater at top schools, when you get down to G5 or lower, the potential savings are pretty insignificant. Suppose you cut Albin (and every other school cut their coaches). You might save $250k. Eliminate the scholarship and room and board, you might save $3-4 million.

That would give you a big enough pool that you can pay a lot of players $25k, and a few people a lot more. But, then how are they going to be connected to the University? If they aren't given scholarships, will they be enrolled? Maybe the future is the past. Once upon a time, teams were affiliated with businesses, rather than Universities. Originally, the team members were employees, but businesses would recruit "ringers" to make their teams better.

There are lots of ways this system can evolve. One thing we know is that things won't stay the same, and perhaps they shouldn't. Some teams could evolve away from Universities and become businesses on their own, while other teams could evolve back to club sports levels. Of one thing I'm certain, and that is that it's not reasonable to pay the players, and to get the money by saddling the general student population with fees and/or tuition increases.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
We can have our cake, or we can eat it.



Oh, I see. I didn't realize this was specific to a model where schools are paying kids directly.

In my view, that's one of the big pluses of the NIL as a solution. It raises money from outside of the universities. The universities aren't gonna love it, of course, because that's not net new money and it used to go to funding crazy locker rooms and practice facilities and such. But at least it leaves the main revenue drivers untouched.


Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 8,670

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 11:54:18 AM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
L.C. wrote:
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
1) Is it necessarily true that the system coming is money at the expense of education? I don't think so....

Only a very, very small percentage of college athletes go to a school that could afford, and play a sport that can afford, to give both scholarships and pay. For the rest (G5, FCS, Division II, Division 3, NAIA) the money just isn't there. If they have to pay the athletes, something else has to give, and I see no other choice but the scholarship money. Cut coaches pay? While the potential savings would be greater at top schools, when you get down to G5 or lower, the potential savings are pretty insignificant. Suppose you cut Albin (and every other school cut their coaches). You might save $250k. Eliminate the scholarship and room and board, you might save $3-4 million.

That would give you a big enough pool that you can pay a lot of players $25k, and a few people a lot more. But, then how are they going to be connected to the University? If they aren't given scholarships, will they be enrolled? Maybe the future is the past. Once upon a time, teams were affiliated with businesses, rather than Universities. Originally, the team members were employees, but businesses would recruit "ringers" to make their teams better.

There are lots of ways this system can evolve. One thing we know is that things won't stay the same, and perhaps they shouldn't. Some teams could evolve away from Universities and become businesses on their own, while other teams could evolve back to club sports levels. Of one thing I'm certain, and that is that it's not reasonable to pay the players, and to get the money by saddling the general student population with fees and/or tuition increases.

Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
...
We can have our cake, or we can eat it.



Oh, I see. I didn't realize this was specific to a model where schools are paying kids directly.

In my view, that's one of the big pluses of the NIL as a solution. It raises money from outside of the universities. The universities aren't gonna love it, of course, because that's not net new money and it used to go to funding crazy locker rooms and practice facilities and such. But at least it leaves the main revenue drivers untouched.




Letís face it, money in a players pocket will trump a new locker room or how many XBoxís are in the player lounge.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 2,669

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/22/2023 12:51:16 PM 
BillyTheCat wrote:


Letís face it, money in a players pocket will trump a new locker room or how many XBoxís are in the player lounge.


Yep, 100% agree. To me, that's the underlying reality of the NIL -- much of the same money that's going to players directly now was going to players indirectly before.

It couldn't be actual cash, so instead programs took donor money and spent it on players in ways that would attract them to their program.

Back to Top
  
giacomo
General User

Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,356

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/24/2023 6:04:11 PM 
Exactly. Non monetary compensation. Every perk except money in the pocket.
Back to Top
  
IceCat76
General User

Member Since: 12/5/2016
Location: Byfield, MA
Post Count: 212

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/26/2023 10:09:26 AM 
Pardon me if this link has already been shared. I was trying to google Ed O'Bannon's name and came across this article. Apparently back in October lawyers filed for class status for NIL. If this happens it will be tough on the schools. These guys are looking for a piece of the action NCAA broadcast rights.

as I previously mentioned my apologies if this has already been discussed.

https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2022/house-ncaa-law... /
Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 13,058

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: NIL deal for Kurtis
   Posted: 1/26/2023 10:56:41 AM 
IceCat76 wrote:
Pardon me if this link has already been shared. I was trying to google Ed O'Bannon's name and came across this article. Apparently back in October lawyers filed for class status for NIL. If this happens it will be tough on the schools. These guys are looking for a piece of the action NCAA broadcast rights.

as I previously mentioned my apologies if this has already been discussed.

https://www.sportico.com/law/analysis/2022/house-ncaa-law... /


Power 5 may soon stand for five schools not five conferences.


"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
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 47  of 47 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             







Copyright ©2023 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties