• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

The Wit and Wisdom of Annie Apple

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
MililaniBuckeye said:
Let me get this straight...someone is seriously suggesting that the university fund the travel expenses for the family of all the players? What's next, fund all the season ticket holders? Fund all alumni travel? Just be glad your son gets a free education at a great university, gets to play for one of greatest college college football programs ever, and has a chance of eventually playing in the NFL. I wonder if those who are complaining about this also travel to the regular-season away games.
Click to expand...
What if she was white? :roll1:
 
Upvote 0
The amount of money involved in the post seasons of men's basketball and football has increased exponentially year after year after year. Coaches salaries, assistant coach salaries, uniform contracts, tv money, merchandise licensing, bowl and tournament revenue. ..it's astronomical compared to even ten years ago. The cost of a scholarship has increased as well but income has far outpaced revenue. It's ridiculous that they still claim there's no extra money. It's there. I can't think of a better use, and a better PR move amid growing support for players to be paid, than to look out for the families of the guys earning the money. It's the right thing to do.
 
Upvote 0
Buckeye86 said:
You make a terrible straw man argument once again. The answer is obviously no to both of those scenarios.

These kids make billions of dollars for other people. Maybe let their families watch them play?

The only question is where you draw the line for what constitutes a family member. You also obviously don't allow them to sell their tickets or travel packages for a profit.
Click to expand...
So, if you work for a company that makes billions, that company should fund your family vacations? And no, my argument is not a straw man argument.
 
Upvote 0
BUCKYLE said:
The amount of money involved in the post seasons of men's basketball and football has increased exponentially year after year after year. Coaches salaries, assistant coach salaries, uniform contracts, tv money, merchandise licensing, bowl and tournament revenue. ..it's astronomical compared to even ten years ago. The cost of a scholarship has increased as well but income has far outpaced revenue. It's ridiculous that they still claim there's no extra money. It's there. I can't think of a better use, and a better PR move amid growing support for players to be paid, than to look out for the families of the guys earning the money. It's the right thing to do.
Click to expand...
Nope. Next...
 
Upvote 0
Waaaah, my son gets to play for the best coach in America, for the best team, gets to be on national TV every week, and gets a free education, but the university won't fund our trip. We're soooooo fucking oppressed...
 
Upvote 0
scarletmike said:
From what I've seen, she hasn't been asking for the school to completely fund, but is saying that if the school wants to completely fund it, they can't. Neither can boosters or anyone else, really. I believe it would even be a violation for me, as a regular joe, to send a gift of any amount towards travel for the bowl. I think the bowl companies are the only ones that could without it being a violation. Of course, we all know they won't forgo a $500k booze cruise to bring the players' families to the bowls.
Click to expand...
I can support bowl sponsors being allowed to fund travel for immediate family members of players as part of the swag players get. I just don't think the schools should be made to fund travel for families because it could open up Pandora's box...
 
Upvote 0
jwinslow said:
You seem to be struggling with what a straw man is.

These are obvious strawman arguments
if they aren't, then where did someone suggest those things ?
Click to expand...
Because funding one section of non-athletes could lead to funding to another section of non-athletes...the argument is indeed related to the original point. Thus, not a straw man argument...
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
So, if you work for a company that makes billions, that company should fund your family vacations? And no, my argument is not a straw man argument.
Click to expand...
It could be considered a bad slippery slope argument as well I suppose, but I wanted to link it to flawed arguments you have made in the past.

Either way, you set up ridiculous scenarios and mock them/knock them down to support your position. Slippery slope/straw man... whatever.

Your "company paying for vacation" analogy is apples and oranges.

Do you have a book full of cliche bad arguments that you reference?
 
Upvote 0
Actually companies pay for paid vacations for successful employees all the time. My son-in-law is a team leader for a sales team. If his team meets its goals, it is not unusual for them and their spouses to get team trips, all expenses paid. These are under the guise of "meetings."
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top