Johnny Manziel = Tebow 2.0, with issues

Discuss your thoughts about anything draft related. Mocks, College and Pro. Knock yourselves out!!! RATING: PG-13
  • Educational systems are rooted in the attempt at equal opportunity, thereby making college sports adherent to those same scholastic philosophies. College football programs are used to fund other programs as well as other activities in the university unrelated to football. In order to compete in your "Moral" plan, a school would have to pull funding from non-revenue sports. So, in your Darwinian argument which, I agree with in many aspects of life, those people would be SOL because they chose to excel in a non-revenue sport.

    I'm not sure you understand the interconnectivity of university funding. But its fun to talk in absolutes. Carry on.
    User avatar
    seahawk2k
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1642
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm


  • seahawk2k wrote:Educational systems are rooted in the attempt at equal opportunity, thereby making college sports adherent to those same scholastic philosophies. College football programs are used to fund other programs as well as other activities in the university unrelated to football. In order to compete in your "Moral" plan, a school would have to pull funding from non-revenue sports. So, in your Darwinian argument which, I agree with in many aspects of life, those people would be SOL because they chose to excel in a non-revenue sport.

    I'm not sure you understand the interconnectivity of university funding. But its fun to talk in absolutes. Carry on.


    If somebody outside of the NCAA is willing to pay you more money, who is the NCAA to say no? We live in America and in a free market society. You should be able to be paid as much as someone is willing to pay you. The fact that non revenue sport athletes won't make that money doesn't matter. If non revenue athletes aren't able to sell autographs or make money, that shouldn't stop other athletes from making money in a free market system.

    The NCAA shouldn't have to directly pay athletes, but if an athlete is able to profit of his talent, why should the NCAA stop it? Your view of college athletics would make sense if the NCAA wasn't making billions from college football. College athletics aren't equal. Some sports make money and some sports don't make money for their schools and the NCAA.

    Athletic programs won't have to pull funding from non-revenue sports, because schools wouldn't be directly paying these athletes. Athletes would be able to sell their own things (advertisements, etc.) and if boosters wanted to then they could pay athletes as well.

    I just think there should be a free market, where individual athletes can make money off their talent outside of the NCAA. A guy like Manziel should be able to sell autographs and other things to make money. The ability to sell autographs and other things should have nothing to do with the NCAA.

    There should be a free market, where boosters can pay athletes and allow the athletes to make as much money as possible. What's wrong with that? Let the athletes have bidding for their services in recruiting if possible and if the athletes want it.

    BTW, and I'll say this again, boosters will always have an affect and schools with money will always have an advantage. Check out the facilities Uncle Phil has built in Eugene. Check out the facilities at Oklahoma State due to the billionaire booster T. Boone Pickens. You can ignore this, but these facilities have a direct affect on recruiting and these men are the biggest reasons their schools have had the success they've had.

    Since the NCAA is a big money business, the athletes should have the right to profit from their talent in a free market system. That's the best way to deal with it. The NCAA isn't a "non profit" like they want you to believe.
    Dawgs0
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 170
    Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:50 pm


  • Fair enough. Like I said, I agree about autographs, but anything further should be regulated. I do not think its wise to allow boosters to directly pay players. These are kids, they shouldn't be showered with that kind of money. There is a difference between indirect funding(Athletic buildings, new facilities, donations) and direct payments to players. Surely you know that.

    And I have never once minimized the impact that new facilities create, I've donated to my own schools much needed facility upgrades for years.
    User avatar
    seahawk2k
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1642
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm


  • seahawk2k wrote:Fair enough. Like I said, I agree about autographs, but anything further should be regulated. I do not think its wise to allow boosters to directly pay players. These are kids, they shouldn't be showered with that kind of money. There is a difference between indirect funding(Athletic buildings, new facilities, donations) and direct payments to players. Surely you know that.

    And I have never once minimized the impact that new facilities create, I've donated to my own schools much needed facility upgrades for years.


    Athletes are entertainers, are they not? So when entertainers get paid in the music or other entertainment industries in similar age groups, where is the difference? Should those "kids" not be "showered with that kind of money", when they earn it? That's laughable.

    BTW, these athletes aren't "kids", they are 18-22 year old adults. These athletes bring in billions, so no matter how old they are, they should be able to be fairly compensated for what they bring in to the schools and the NCAA. It's only fair in the free market country we live in.

    I mean boosters don't HAVE to pay them, but I'm sure many boosters would want to. If boosters want to compensate athletes for the money those athletes bring in, why should the NCAA stop it? Why should the NCAA stop athletes from making money legally? What's wrong with that?
    Dawgs0
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 170
    Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:50 pm


  • Soon elementary, Intermediate Schools and High School students would demand to get paid.


    Do you even realize how much the NCAAF pay the schools when they play the BCS bowl?

    If ND got into a BCS Bid, the school would earn 6.1mill.
    Carmon1274
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 499
    Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 1:50 pm


  • Dawgs0 wrote:
    seahawk2k wrote:Fair enough. Like I said, I agree about autographs, but anything further should be regulated. I do not think its wise to allow boosters to directly pay players. These are kids, they shouldn't be showered with that kind of money. There is a difference between indirect funding(Athletic buildings, new facilities, donations) and direct payments to players. Surely you know that.

    And I have never once minimized the impact that new facilities create, I've donated to my own schools much needed facility upgrades for years.


    Athletes are entertainers, are they not? So when entertainers get paid in the music or other entertainment industries in similar age groups, where is the difference? Should those "kids" not be "showered with that kind of money", when they earn it? That's laughable.

    BTW, these athletes aren't "kids", they are 18-22 year old adults. These athletes bring in billions, so no matter how old they are, they should be able to be fairly compensated for what they bring in to the schools and the NCAA. It's only fair in the free market country we live in.

    I mean boosters don't HAVE to pay them, but I'm sure many boosters would want to. If boosters want to compensate athletes for the money those athletes bring in, why should the NCAA stop it? Why should the NCAA stop athletes from making money legally? What's wrong with that?


    I'm not arguing this further. I've said my piece, you've said yours. No use beating a dead horse. Its not like either of us is going to come around to the others point at this juncture. Cheers.
    User avatar
    seahawk2k
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1642
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 3:41 pm



  • He reminds me of Colt McCoy, only much better under duress.
    "God Bless the Seattle Seahawks" Cortez Kennedy
    User avatar
    ivotuk
    * NET Nobody *
     
    Posts: 8694
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:29 pm
    Location: North Pole, Alaska


  • I don't know that I've ever read more idiotic arguments in my life. Even responding to them would just serve to make us all more stupid. 'Murica... where you can do whatever you want, and there should be no regulamation by nobody no how, because that's just un 'Murican. YEEE-haw!!!!! (shoots pistols into a crowded festival while dancing around Yosemite Sam style for effect).
    Image
    R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
    1/12/39 - 8/7/08
    User avatar
    SharkHawk
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3883
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • He's still better than any QB in the Pac-whatever. Carry on haters.
    Stoned Cold
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 255
    Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:28 pm


  • Carmon1274 wrote:Also if schools bribe players, or give them money.

    It's not wrong for Professional teams to distribute heavy $$ to refs then right?

    How you equate those two...I don't know, besides you being painfully stupid.

    Players should be allowed to skip college and go straight to the NFL to make their money, if they can. If not, let college football be their grounds to develop. Forcing them to pay for free (essentially) and risk career ending injury is silly. Colleges should also not be able to sell ANYTHING that relates to the player, no jersey with numbers on them, no pictures, no nothing without the player getting a cut of some sort, period. A scholarship is nice and all, but how many of these kids don't even bother to get their degree? The reason being college football is a FORCED stopping point before jumping to the pros. Take away the "forced" and let college football rest on its own merits or pay the kids relative to the risk they take and the money they bring in. Eventually there's going to be a lawsuit on antitrust grounds that will eliminate the requirement of any time in college football/time after highschool requirement by the NFL. The NCAA should jump ahead of it or just wait to fall victim to it.
    User avatar
    pinksheets
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2836
    Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:47 pm
    Location: Seattle


  • SharkHawk wrote:I don't know that I've ever read more idiotic arguments in my life. Even responding to them would just serve to make us all more stupid. 'Murica... where you can do whatever you want, and there should be no regulamation by nobody no how, because that's just un 'Murican. YEEE-haw!!!!! (shoots pistols into a crowded festival while dancing around Yosemite Sam style for effect).

    You aren't always this concise. You should be. Point made.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11216
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • Hey, a compliment (supposedly) and a complete and utter slam on how I interact with others on this board all in one post. Thanks... I guess.

    I'm the type who will make one post that is 1,000 words long rather than 1,000 idiotic one sentence posts. Different strokes. Feel free to hit the ol' 'blockola' on me Scotte. I am sorry to offend with lengthy posts on a message board of all things. Oh the humanity.
    Image
    R.I.P. Dad. I miss you. You will never be forgotten
    1/12/39 - 8/7/08
    User avatar
    SharkHawk
    * NET Alumni *
     
    Posts: 3883
    Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:47 am


  • SharkHawk wrote:Hey, a compliment (supposedly) and a complete and utter slam on how I interact with others on this board all in one post. Thanks... I guess.

    I'm the type who will make one post that is 1,000 words long rather than 1,000 idiotic one sentence posts. Different strokes. Feel free to hit the ol' 'blockola' on me Scotte. I am sorry to offend with lengthy posts on a message board of all things. Oh the humanity.

    I intended no disrespect. I apologize.
    SEAHAWKS.NET. We All We Got, We All We Need
    User avatar
    Scottemojo
    *Scott of Smacksville*
    *Scott of Smacksville*
     
    Posts: 11216
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 9:14 am


  • SharkHawk wrote:Hey, a compliment (supposedly) and a complete and utter slam on how I interact with others on this board all in one post. Thanks... I guess.

    I'm the type who will make one post that is 1,000 words long rather than 1,000 idiotic one sentence posts. Different strokes. Feel free to hit the ol' 'blockola' on me Scotte. I am sorry to offend with lengthy posts on a message board of all things. Oh the humanity.


    You should probably re-read Scotte's post in a "Scotte voice". He wasn't slamming you at all, especially as you've made a number of references to your own verbosity. If you're going to self-deprecate, then don't be offended when others take that as a sign that it's OK to mention, too.
    Super Bowl Champions XVLIII

    RIP Radish: Check your PMs. Upper right corner.
    User avatar
    Sarlacc83
    * NET Philistine *
     
    Posts: 15443
    Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
    Location: Portland, OR


  • pinksheets wrote:Eventually there's going to be a lawsuit on antitrust grounds that will eliminate the requirement of any time in college football/time after highschool requirement by the NFL. The NCAA should jump ahead of it or just wait to fall victim to it.


    If history tells us anything, it's that the NCAA and the NFL have nothing to worry about. Clarett and BMW concur.

    http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1177&context=key_workplace

    I love the thought of 18 year old's trying to play in the NFL. The image of Kam Chancellor putting a teenager into early retirement and a vegetative state would be totally worth seeing just once so that everyone could realize that it's probably a good thing that these guys go to college first.
    Talkin Seahawks All Day, All Night @ my blog Seafense! http://seafense.blogspot.com/
    User avatar
    NYCoug
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 1415
    Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 5:45 pm


  • http://sports.yahoo.com/news/mlb--is-it ... 19281.html

    Dan Wetzel goes further and states that LLWS athletes (kids) should be paid. Do you agree/disagree? Personally, the argument makes sense to me. If Disney channel pays child actors, then athletes should be paid as well. They both make millions for the adults in charge of these companies. The difference is, athletes are not compensated at levels under the pro level and it isn't fair to them.
    Dawgs0
    NET Rookie
     
    Posts: 170
    Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:50 pm


  • Mel Kiper has Johny Football going #1 to the Texans in his latest mock draft.
    I honestly don't think he will be a Tim Tebow. The kid has heart. The kid can play. He might not have the measurable ot the prototypical QB, but he wills his teams to success.
    A good conditioning program can add some meat to that frame. I think he will be a top 10 pick in May.
    Joe
    joeseahawks
    *The Prophet*
     
    Posts: 947
    Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2012 3:43 pm


  • Now he's taking shots at the 12 th man. F you Johnny and Texas A&m.
    CPHawk
    NET Veteran
     
    Posts: 2229
    Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:49 pm


PreviousNext


It is currently Mon Oct 20, 2014 10:23 am

Please REGISTER to become a member

Return to [ THE NCAA FOOTBALL & PRO DRAFT FORUM ]




Information
  • Who is online
  • Users browsing this forum: JSeahawks and 6 guests