NIL is a SHAM.
I keep wondering how the two entities that have been profiting billions of dollars a year, the TV networks and the Universities, have somehow slithered out of being part of the monetization of college athletes? It has somehow fallen solely on outside support and donations from fans and donors, how TF did that happen?
ESPN, FOX, NBC etc ALL profiting BILLIONS of dollars a year off the backs of college athletes for 50-60 years. All the major universities, receiving hundreds of millions of dollars over a few years, building their athletic and educational infrastructure off the backs of college athletes who until recently would be kicked off the team if someone bought them a cheeseburger.
How have these two entities escaped even being part of, if not completely responsible for the monetization of college athletes? Why are we all sheep, not questioning this and accepting this as the new normal because now the athletes are at least making some money, even thought the two biggest profiteers get off scot-free?
Are they paid actors who should be compensated as such. How much do actors on sitcoms and other TV series get paid from the networks? Why are they different?
Just a thought, call me crazy.
Hey, Crazy.
It's not crazy at all, it's a legitimate question.
Universities especially are overpriced and ripping so many students off, it is a sham.
OP really did not need a manifesto.
That's what people said about Marx, and look how he revolutionized college sports.
Harpo Marx?
I'm not even halfway through Connor's yet. No more room for manifestos on my bed table.
Speaking of hoaxes we all believe in.
Was this a manifesto? It didnt feel like one, a long winded rant maybe.
Full of half truths and outright lies.
For example, the most popular sitcom is Mom. Mom is produced by Chuck Lorre and Warner Brothers and airs on CBS. CBS doesn’t pay the actors ANYTHING. They buy episodes of the show from Chuck Lorre who pays the actors. This is completely analogous to ESPN paying universities for rights to football games.
I believe that money is involved in providing education (professors are paid in money,) room and board, access to training facilities (how much does access to a top notch gym cost?) and full cost of attendance stipends. Is it what the OP thinks is fair? I don’t know, because they only claim that the athletes are getting no money from the universities (which is false) or the networks. They provide an analogy to sitcoms that I disproved with a one minute google search.
Have had similar thoughts, and voiced them here from time to time. It's been a little bit of a sleight of hand that pressure for universities to pay athletes from their enormous earnings resulted in an edict that they--the athletes--could make money, and so many were dazzled by this. When Tom Brady signs a t-shirt deal, we don't think of it as his salary. And we know, implicitly, that the rest of his fellow athletes aren't going to take part or profit. The stars, the rich, got richer. The universities slipped the noose. All of the difficult issues are still there, along with a lot of new chaos.
How many damned t-shirts does the world really need? More commercials for Sam's Used Cars? Yet, somehow, this was a glorious triumph for capitalism and free enterprise. Inevitable! Some of the responses here, at the outset, were embarrassing.
A circus sideshow, and a diversion. A diversionary tactic, we may come to see. The door was opened a crack though. Now the athletes need to rush through.
April 13th, 2024 at 10:41 AM ^
"A circus sideshow, and a diversion. A diversionary tactic, we may come to see. The door was opened a crack though. Now the athletes need to rush through."
I agree with you completely, these athletes need to continue to pursue this, do not allow NIL to be the diversion. As another poster mentioned, I would love to see the B1G and especially the U of M be proactive in fixing this inequity, be "the leaders and best" as they so proudly proclaim.
"Some of the responses here, at the outset, were embarrassing."
I think that's pretty normal in our society, people lash out at what they don't/cant comprehend, I expected it. There is one poster here, "crg" that has negged me 30-40 times on this topic. I smile at the amount of energy some are willing to waste being negative about something they simply can not grasp.
Somehow, these athletes not being fairly compensated has become so ingrained that most cant grasp the inequities, they truly believe it's perfectly acceptable for the TV networks and NCAA to profit billions while offering "a free education" in return. I always love that term, "free education", it's as if the athlete is offering nothing in return for this "free education". Mind boggling.
It is curious how, for some claiming to not care about another's opinion, you seem to get very agitated (such to the point of invoking them into random comments). Maybe you should take a break from internet message boards, for your own well being.
OP asked me to call them crazy so I just obliged
Some days the humor is just broke on this site. I thought it was hilarious.
Thank god someone said it.
April 12th, 2024 at 11:34 PM ^
HUEL must have updated the comedy code.
You know call me crazy but if only we had a coach bold enough to call for revenue sharing with the athletes. That would be a visionary and progressive way to deal with this situation. It's just a shame nobody has the balls to speak their mind on this matter.
But if such a coach did exist (and we all know he doesn’t) my guess is the powers that be wouldn’t like that very much. My guess is they’d do anything to drive such a coach out of the NCAA, and by anything I mean that might even have the notion to make up spurious charges against him to prove their point. They might even suspend that coach (if he existed) multiple times without due cause. Hell, it wouldn’t surprise me if they went so far as to pull his AD aside and say “if he goes, your troubles with us leave with him.”
I mean in this purely hypothetical world it might happen.
Oh hell yeah. I dont watch too much TV so I've never seen this but it is pretty spot on. Just need to have the TV exec sitting in the office with him.
"but the slaves get a free education from this prestigious institution, while we only profit BILLIONS OF DOLLARS A YEAR, that's fair isn't it"
It's like when the plantation owners convinced themselves that allowing the slaves to have food, clothing and a roof was more than equitable compensation for what they provided.
I always love this argument, somehow the minions have bought into this fairy tale for decades. It's pure comedy.
April 13th, 2024 at 10:13 AM ^
There is more than a little something to this uncomfortable comparison. I have a Black friend who calls the NFL 'the new plantation,' but the designation may be even more apt in the college milieu. The idea that they're enlightening the savages in plucking them from their natal homes and allowing them to take part in their enlightened settings has also been part of the ur-narrative too, no? :)
April 13th, 2024 at 10:18 AM ^
BIG schools each made 59M from TV money last year.
Michigan has like 27 or 28 non-revenue sports.
Their net profits were 15-20M.
That's Michigan, one of the top 5 revenue schools.
Billions in revenues.
Billions in expenses too.
April 13th, 2024 at 10:38 AM ^
It's easy to make expenses happen especially when you are trying to make the bottom line look less insane and controversial.
Explain a surplus to me like I'm 5
You want to set up an athletic department and mommy and daddy give you $10B, but it only costs you $6B. So if you give back the money, next year...
I'd be 6
...mommy and daddy would only give you $6B, cause that is what they think it costs to run an athletic department.
day drinking?
which two entities of the many you named?
crazy.
People in positions of power will always attempt to extract wealth from people not in positions of power. This has been happening for thousands of years and will continue until humans are extinct.
Just like pro teams worth several billion dollars ask the taxpayers to fund their stadiums...for which they sell suites, concessions, etc.
But think about how difficult it must be for the Hunt family, all they have is the profits from three super bowls and Patrick Mahomes how are they supposed to get by?
April 13th, 2024 at 10:14 AM ^
So does that mean we should accept it? I'm never sure where people are going when they repeat such shibboleths.
I agree completely
Completely? Wow, so you're crazy too? :))
Nah, DB's more on the grumpy spectrum than anything else. 😉
(Edit/add: hey DB, how you doing, BTW? You get squared away with that work-related remedy delay/issue, I hope?)
You’re crazy.
Make an NIL contribution and go to bed.
What's the minimum?
Nah, nvm, I cant even do that, I'd be capitulating to something I disagree with. Once again those most able to compensate get away with paying NOTHING.
RadOWon has always made NIL contributions
⭐️🌙🔹waves hand🔹🌙⭐️
NIL contributions are for suckers.
Child, this is a Wendy's.
Unhinged rants should be lodged at the DMV, as God intended.
Dad, I noticed you negged nearly every one of my posts, I hope it makes you feel all warmy inside. However I may be of assistance on this beauteous Friday afternoon here in San Diego County, I am happy to oblige. I also take special requests.
BTW, there is no God.
Tell yourself whatever you need to hear.
April 12th, 2024 at 10:21 PM ^
I just counted, you've negged me over THIRTY TIMES on this thread. I feel so special, I'm so happy you have found happiness in your negativity. Just so you know, I have "liked" every single post you've made here.
Glad I could help a friend in need, little buddy. Much love and I'm sorry I offended you, I'll try to only post topics you agree with in the future because I aim to please YOU and only YOU little buddy.
April 13th, 2024 at 12:36 PM ^
Good lord-quit whining. Who checks to see who has negged them and how many times?
That’s the guy who tried to ruin cfb risk by creating a bunch of OSU bots. Anything he says should be ignored.
Edit: now he’s negging me. You mad I called you out? What kind of fucking loser gets mad he can’t be the general of the Michigan risk team so he makes a bunch of bots to submit moves for OSU to try to tank a game. That is like what a 5 year old does
April 12th, 2024 at 10:24 PM ^
Oh damn, and here I thought I was special, I'm heart broken. I was positive he only had eyes for me.
April 13th, 2024 at 12:54 AM ^
Why does this not shock me at all. How pathetic is ones existence if they behave this way? More than anything, I pity this individual, I truly pity them. I'm saddened that they are this desperate in their lives that they are motivated to behave like a neanderthal. It's really very sad.
April 13th, 2024 at 10:34 AM ^
That is quite a story you (or someone) has created. It's not true, but very curious.
April 13th, 2024 at 11:06 AM ^
I'd bet my left nut it is true.
You have used your energy to neg every post I've made on this topic so you doing what he accused you of is more than plausible. I believe him when he says your actions became psychotic when you were offended by something you disagreed with. Your actions are that of a sad, pathetic, insecure little man.
I find you negging me to be both comedic and pathetic. I've been coming to this board or some iteration of it, since I first got dial up internet. Do you think the number of points I have is important to me? Neg all you want, it's pure comedy that I have triggered you to this extent. A little stalkerish but good humor.
April 13th, 2024 at 11:30 AM ^
Keep up the attitude - it's working well for you.
April 13th, 2024 at 11:03 AM ^
Says the guy who believes Michigan admissions isn't broken and that Stanford's undergraduate credits shouldn't transfer to Michigan!
Yeah okay, thumbs up, unhinged guy.
April 13th, 2024 at 11:31 AM ^
When did I ever say that Stanford's credits shouldn't transfer?
You might be confusing that with "what transfer credits will individual departments/programs count towards their degree"... which is all on the discretion of those departments (nothing to do with university admissions office). Some of those departments can be very picky - not so much "where" the credits originate (but some of that), but very much "what is in that class credit". I've see first hand a department from one part of Michigan not accept credits from another department in the same university for a class that was very similar to one it offered (it may have even had the same name, I don't recall now), but they looked through the syllabus and felt it wasn't up to their standards. The student could count those credits as general elective, but they would not fulfill the degree requirements. Many external transfer credits get the same treatment - probably some from Stanford even if the coursework is different enough.