Blood doping, the NCAA and the Tour de France...

[AKAK]

I don't even care if Festina gets the death penalty now.

 

[Folanator]

As the parent of a D1 athlete, I need to disagree with Steve's commentary. Big College Football provides the funding necessary for a great many student-athletes to pursue sports in college, which leads to a greatly expanded overall educational experience. There's no question in my mind that my daughter got as much or more out of the intercollegiate competition, and the network she built with other athletes both on her teams and others, as she did out of the excellent academics. None of that would have been possible without football and the revenue it brings to the school.

The problem is not, IMO, money, it's the absurd insistence by the NCAA that benefits provided to star athletes are "improper." And the equation of paying for a quarterback's tattoos with "immorality" is similarly absurd.

Those of us in business are accustomed to dealing with supply-and-demand on a daily basis. We're able to get for our products or services whatever the marketplace decides is a fair price. This kind of education should be made available to student-athletes as well. If you look at all the "scandal" that is floating around Big College Football right now, it's almost all related to "improper benefits." Yet what is really improper about them aside from the legalistic, myopic rules of the NCAA which itself profits from the very athletes it wishes to prevent from making a few bucks on the side? BS.

Are you advocating free market economics for student athletes?

 

[MaxBuck]

Are you advocating free market economics for student athletes?

Yes.

 

[TGC OSU'62]

There will always be college football players because there will always be high school football players that need it- whether they are getting extra benefits from it or not, they need college football to get to the next level.

College sports is not about winning. It's about the values that are learned.

Are you advocating free market economics for student athletes?

Yes.

I personally feel that is entirely possible that the participants in CFB (you may call them "just a few 'bad apples' if that is comfortable) can eventually be the demise and ruin of the system.

Without a governing body, it certainly can happen.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/public/NCAA/About+the+NCAA/Who+We+Are/About+the+NCAA+history

"The NCAA was founded in 1906 to protect young people from the dangerous and exploitive athletics practices of the time."

"The rugged nature of early-day football, typified by mass formations and gang tackling, resulted in numerous injuries and deaths and prompted many college and universities to discontinue the sport. In many places, college football was run by student groups that often hired players and allowed them to compete as non-students. Common sentiment among the public was that college football should be reformed or abolished."

The NCAA absolutely is now a business cartel.

2011 is a lot different than 1906 in many respects ... Or is it?

 

[Folanator]

Yes.

I think there is a middle ground. There is a terceary approval of PED's in most sports. I think a "we are looking for the big stuff" from the NCAA is all I.am.looking for. Make best efforts but realize it will nver be perfect. Don't drag the whole thing down with good intentions.

 

[greyscarlet]

Yes.

You're argument has a problem. If cfb players were paid in an open market, there would be minimal profit to be shared with the other sports. Just like any business, college sports would look for immediate roi (and not the long term positives your daughter and society now enjoy).

 

[MaxBuck]

You're argument has a problem. If cfb players were paid in an open market, there would be minimal profit to be shared with the other sports. Just like any business, college sports would look for immediate roi (and not the long term positives your daughter and society now enjoy).

I didn't suggest the players be paid a salary.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

The problem is not, IMO, money, it's the absurd insistence by the NCAA that benefits provided to star athletes are "improper."

If the benefits aren't part of the scholarship itself, or are available to the general student populus, then they are indeed "improper".

I don't know how many times I have to explain why benefits have to be closely monitored and regulated. The split second you allow athletes to receive benefits not available to other students, or to sell anything of theirs at other than fair market value or anything earned by their athletic performance (rings, Gold Pants, etc.), then you open the doors wide open for boosters to launder money to those same athletes.

 

[MaxBuck]

The split second you allow athletes to receive benefits not available to other students, or to sell anything of theirs at other than fair market value or anything earned by their athletic performance (rings, Gold Pants, etc.), then you open the doors wide open for boosters to launder money to those same athletes.

Fallacious argument. You suggest that any commercial transaction constitutes money laundering. Wrong; a purchase is just a purchase, whether it's a head of cabbage, an automobile, or an autograph.

Bottom line: NCAA restricts trade, preventing student-athletes from realizing their fair market value. From each athlete according to his ability, to each according to the NCAA.

That's Communist, man.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Fallacious argument. You suggest that any commercial transaction constitutes money laundering. Wrong; a purchase is just a purchase, whether it's a head of cabbage, an automobile, or an autograph.

Bullshit. If I'm a well-off booster and you allow me to buy a current payer's Gold Pants for $5,000, I'm going to do it. Other rich boosters will be paying outlandish prices for mundane items to funnel cash to players. It's not a difficult concept...

 

[Taosman]

There was a great article in Outside Magazine about a writer who doped because he couldn't get anyone to talk about how prevalent it is in all of sports. Amateur athletes are doping in bicycling to win a t-shirt and water bottle for christ sake. And if you know an athlete who participates on a major level, you probably know a doper. But nobody wants to talk about it because it's taboo. But a big [Mark May] storm is coming because the puritans in Congress can't handle the thought that even high school athletes are using performance enhancers.

Here's the article.
http://www.outsideonline.com/outdoor-adventure/dropping-in/I-Couldn-t-Be-More-Positive.html

And about an amatuer who got caught.
http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutrition/training-fitness/doper-next-door

 

[Taosman]

And the same thinking that wants to go after dopers, works for those trying to protect their antiquated view of college athletics. We're past the time of Congress stepping in and "fixing" college athletics. Just look at who won the National Championships in basketball and football. Both will end up on probation.And the runners up may also!

 

[MaxBuck]

Bull[Mark May]. If I'm a well-off booster and you allow me to buy a current player's Gold Pants for $5,000, I'm going to do it.

And if you're a well-off customer and I allow you to buy a BMW 760i for $125,000, you're similarly going to do it. Nothing wrong with either transaction. I might think 125 large is an "outlandish" amount to pay for a car, but it's your money, man, and you're free to spend it how you like. You can "funnel" cash to your local Bimmer dealer for the 7-series and nobody can say jack shit about it - as it should be.

I'm still awaiting a valid argument from you on this.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

And if you're a well-off customer and I allow you to buy a BMW 760i for $125,000, you're similarly going to do it. Nothing wrong with either transaction. I might think 125 large is an "outlandish" amount to pay for a car, but it's your money, man, and you're free to spend it how you like. You can "funnel" cash to your local Bimmer dealer for the 7-series and nobody can say jack shit about it - as it should be.

I'm still awaiting a valid argument from you on this.

Jesus. Fucking. Cricket. Are you really that stupid? Seriously? Why would I pay $125k for an $85k car? I would not do it. But, I might pay way more than market value for a player's property if I knew it would ensure future recuits saw this and would pick Ohio State because they felt they'd "get paid". Two completely different situations.

And BMWs are available to anyone. Gold Pants are not. Bowl championship rings are not. $5,000 for either Gold Pants or rings is not market value. Athletes don't benefit from Joe Schuckatelli from selling a Beamer from his dealership...only Joe Schmuckatelli does. But athletes do benefit from selling their stuff at outlandish prices or selling things given to them for their athletic performance (and thus not available to the general student population).

Let's try this elementary point one last time and see if you can wrap your feeble mind around it: The point is to keep from funneling money to athletes, because kids who know that if they go to [insert school], that school has enough boosters to buy their shit to make them rich. It's one step below allowing the school itself to bid for/buy recruits.

 

[MaxBuck]

Jesus. [censored]ing. Cricket. Are you really that stupid? Seriously? Why would I pay $125k for an $85k car? I would not do it. But, I might pay way more than market value for a player's property if I knew it would ensure future recuits saw this and would pick Ohio State because they felt they'd "get paid". Two completely different situations.

And BMWs are available to anyone. Gold Pants are not. Bowl championship rings are not. $5,000 for either Gold Pants or rings is not market value. Athletes don't benefit from Joe Schuckatelli from selling a Beamer from his dealership...only Joe Schmuckatelli does. But athletes do benefit from selling their stuff at outlandish prices or selling things given to them for their athletic performance (and thus not available to the general student population).

Let's try this elementary point one last time and see if you can wrap your feeble mind around it: The point is to keep from funneling money to athletes, because kids who know that if they go to [insert school], that school has enough boosters to buy their [Mark May] to make them rich. It's one step below allowing the school itself to bid for/buy recruits.

Aside from the fact you've violated I don't know how many board rules in your insult-laden screed, you evidence absolutely no understanding of basic economic principles.

When you find an Introduction to Economics text, come back and we can talk some more.