zincfinger
Gert Frobe-approved
A valid point. And I certainly wouldn't argue that the NCAA is completely consistent in its rulings, or that one couldn't find arguable logical lapses in NCAA rulings. What I am arguing is that 1) giving players a bunch of stuff and allowing them to sell it for cash would be to indirectly pay the players cash, and would thereby ruin the game, and 2) college players aren't enduring a financial hardship beyond what students in other pseudo-professional fields are enduring.BB73;1924022; said:The cases of Tom Zbikowski and Jeremy Bloom come to mind.
Bloom was unable to play college football at Colorado if he was paid endorsement money for being the world champion moguls skier that he was.
Tom Zbikowski was allowed to have a professional fight in 2006 while still at ND. (Despite the fact that most of you never knew he was a boxer, since the TV guys never mentioned it).
If both of those NCAA decisions had been just the opposite, it would have made more sense to me. Bloom was a world champion who also happened to play football, Zbikowski would have been an unknown boxer if he hadn't also been a football player at ND.
Upvote
0