Unverified Voracity Saw A Lion Floating Through Ether And Bought Some Paint
I have proxy regrets. Michigan did not pursue instate DE Bryce Mostella much. As a person who generates internet content I now declare this a disaster of epic proportions.
Decision announcement coming Friday 2:47 p.m. you might be thinking "that's a random time" well you'll soon find out im a random young man
— Bryce Mostella (@BryceMostella) July 4, 2019
— Bryce Mostella (@BryceMostella) July 5, 2019
This is now his twitter avi:
Congratulations, Penn State internet. May you ask Bryce Mostella to rip your fingernails out with your Hello Kitty pliers or whatever it is that you're doing out there with your vape pens.
[After THE JUMP: Metellus can play, Franz can guard, college baseball can't have nice things]
The GOAT. Charles Woodson, devious person:
Yooooo @CharlesWoodson this is the play where you finessed us!
— Will Blackmon (@WillBlackmon) June 30, 2019
Clearly we are in cov2.
I have the the flat, but here You told me last min to play soft in my coverage & sink more with my guy.
I was confused cuz it was 3rd & short, but I trusted you
pic.twitter.com/eZvAzY6Stv
PFF bits. This was aided by Michigan's scheme somewhat (Michigan lined Metellus up with outside leverage and gave him LB support on slants) but Josh Metellus is pretty good at coverage nonetheless:
Throw on Josh Metellus at your own risk: last season he only allowed a 41.8% completion percentage, nabbed 3 interceptions and held opposing quarterbacks to a 34.3 passer rating pic.twitter.com/AdQQz2sVEQ
— PFF College (@PFF_College) July 4, 2019
Their Patterson stats are getting sliced pretty thin but here are a couple more:
By having a 51.9% adjusted completion percentage on deep passes last season, Shea Patterson leads the returning contingent of B1G Quarterbacks. pic.twitter.com/MlfUfxF31B
— PFF College (@PFF_College) July 8, 2019
Shea Patterson DOMINATED on 3rd and 4th down for Michigan last season. pic.twitter.com/tJ5NfT9PC4
— PFF College (@PFF_College) July 8, 2019
Collins and DPJ help out on the deep balls, but also those guys are both back so bombing away should be on the menu again.
And this time it might even continue against good teams. We all know the reason for this statistical cliff:
If ... Shea Patterson finds a No. 1 receiver. Patterson's full-season numbers were decent (65 percent completion rate, 12.4 yards per completion, 82.0 QBR), but that's mostly because he torched lesser opponents. In games against more evenly matched opponents, the passing game was harmless.
Against five opponents that finished the year ranked, Patterson still completed 62 percent of his throws, but at just 11.3 yards per completion. It was 10.3 in three losses. Donovan Peoples-Jones averaged 18.4 yards per catch against unranked foes and 8.7 against ranked. Be it Peoples-Jones, Nico Collins, a finally healthy Tarik Black, or someone else, the Wolverines need a playmaker against the teams with the strongest pulse.
It doesn't have anything to do with Patterson or the playmakers, and has everything to do with the fact that Michigan's entire season was built around mitigating the fact their tackles couldn't pass protect. Gattis's system promises less in the way of traditional takes-forever drop-back passing, which will hopefully blunt opposing DEs when Michigan does try to go long. And hopefully the right tackle is a large upgrade on Juwann Bushell-Beatty.
6'9" shooting guard, okay. Sam Webb got in contact with Derrick Walton to talk about Franz Wagner and Juwan Howard; all of it is interesting but for Michigan's minutes distribution this is probably the most interesting bit:
“(He’s) really good at being able to pick things fast, and that will definitely allow him to be able to make an immediate impact. He shoots it really well. He's long and is an active defender. (He has) good hands and quick feet. (He’s) really able to guard one through three, (and) possibly the four with this length.”
Walton's been guarded by Franz so he'd probably know. If Franz can guard twos and threes that gives Michigan flexibility to pick whoever emerges from the Brooks/DDJ/Nunez/Bajema/Johns scrum, no matter their position. My money is on Johns being the fifth starter since Michigan has an elite big-man developer and Johns' lack of minutes last year is more attributable to his status as a miscast 5 than talent issues.
Walton also has the standard encomium about what a good dude Howard is; the two overlapped in Miami for a bit.
All right, guy! Getting Franz is a big deal; this is less of a big deal but it's still a good sign:
Michigan, Tennessee, North Carolina, Memphis, and Florida, make up the final-five for Jaden Springer, five-star rising senior. He’s taken an official visit to Tennessee.
— Jake (@jakeweingarten) July 9, 2019
Another takeaway, Juwan Howard getting Michigan in the final-five for Springer. He’s been impressive.
I had never heard that guy's name until he put Michigan in his top 5; he's a 6'4" shooting guard currently ranked 11th in the 2020 class. That brings the number of top 50 2020 recruits Michigan is in on up to approximately 10. In addition to Springer, they're in the picture for Josh Christopher, Walker Kessler, Isaiah Jackson, Nimari Burnett, Hunter Dickinson, Dawson Garcia, Mady Sissoko, Lance Ware ("it is Michigan basketball, you don’t have to say much about it; the name says it all”) and Jabri Abdur-Rahim. Whether they get any of these guys is an open question; it's clear Michigan's recruiting focus has shifted under Howard.
Cumong, baseball guy. Most of the Big Ten voted to shoot down a third paid assistant in baseball, including Warde Manuel. This has southern programs irritated, which is good. Because this guy is glossing over the dumbest schedule in sports when he makes this assertion:
Now that Michigan has reached the pinnacle of college baseball, it’s time for the rest of the Big Ten and even the Wolverines to establish consistency.
It’s not realistic to think Michigan can be in Omaha every couple of years. Even programs like LSU and Texas are unable to accomplish that goal. But the league has enough resources to become a consistent force on the national level, while with a couple of breaks, it gets a team to Omaha every couple of years.
Do that and everything else should fall into place. More administrators will support programs with more robust salaries and facilities upgrades, academic rules could be eased to make it a little easier for prospective recruits, more recruits in the region will spurn the glamour of the SEC and ACC to stay at home and become the next Joe Donovan in Omaha.
And to top it all off, perhaps the next time we vote on a third assistant, it will be considered a no brainer like it was in the SEC and other leagues.
The Big Ten will never be more than the A-10 of college baseball as long as their teams spend the first month of the season on the road because it's in February, and the second month of the season freezing their butts off. Saying the "Big Ten needs to get serious about baseball" is like saying the SEC needs to get serious about outdoor hockey games.
And Kendall Rogers knows this since he just wrote this bit in the piece on Bakich being coach of the year:
The reality is that it’s just a lot harder for a cold-weather team to climb to the top of the mountain in a warm-weather sport when the season starts in mid-February. It’s harder to recruit, it’s harder to win nonconference games when the weather forces you to travel for the first six weeks of the season, and that makes it harder to put yourself in a position to host regionals and supers — which is the key to consistent postseason success.
You want a third assistant? Move the CWS back two weeks. You want more scholarships? Move the CWS back two weeks. You want anything? Move the CWS back two weeks.
NIL discussion. The State compiles some quotes about the prospect of name and image rights reverting to the players; it's a mix of the standard oblivious quotes from suited muckety-mucks…
“This is personal opinion but when I see name, image, likeness it makes me feel like it is pay for play,” South Carolina’s athletics director said. “I’m like, ‘This gives me angst.’ ”
Southeastern Conference commissioner Greg Sankey feels the same way.
“My stance hasn’t changed since I testified in the (Ed) O’Bannon case,” Sankey said. “I think the funding and financial support provided to student-athlete is appropriately tied to their educational pursuits. There is a period at the end of that sentence.”
…and somewhat surprising takes from the coaches:
South Carolina football coach Will Muschamp and many of his colleagues were supportive of the idea.
“I’m absolutely in support of it,” Muschamp said. “As much as we can help the players, we need to.”
Georgia basketball coach Tom Crean went even further.
“Something needs to be done and I think the fact that the committee is being put together means it will be done,” Crean said. “I don’t think there’s any question that something needs to be done.”
When even the coaches, whose giant salaries are inflated by athletes playing for free, think things should be opened up maybe they should be opened up. Money quote:
“I think it’s an interesting thing that they are now going to explore going against something they spent millions and millions of dollars trying to defend. I think it’s going to make a whole lot of the things the NCAA has stated for the last 20, 30, 40 years look in many ways quite foolish.”
Etc.: Game three of the CWS finals was the most-watched baseball broadcast on ESPN this year. Daily alum J Brady McCullough on the NCAA having it both ways. Local chefs' favorite places to eat. It's a dive-heavy list. Nixon? Nixon.
Kinda funny seeing Tanner Morgan on that deep passing list. I went to the Minnesota-Indiana game last year, a shootout won in dramatic fashion by Minnesota. Minnesota's entire passing game consisted of RPO slants until the last drive, when they brilliantly baited Indiana by tossing out a run package that suggested they were playing for overtime (despite the high score this was plausible, as it was a wet day and Minnesota had lost a large lead due to fumbles) and threw a massive bomb that connected for the win.
Minnesota doesn't go downfield much, but when they do they have big targets that are often wide open due to the scheme.
Of course, Michigan didn't go downfield much at all, either. Anyway, that stat might not mean much.
*btw haven't mentioned this yet but I'm really excited about what Franz brings to the table. At least it looks like he can fill an Iggy-type role, but there's a possibility that he can actually be a bit more dangerous on offense.
I am ready for the creepy picture to come off the board.
I expect Johns to play around 20 minutes this year at the 4 and be within the top 7 guys rotating. But I'm still a little skeptical that he'll be the starter and push Livers and Wagner down a spot.....at least to start the year. Maybe Juwan works some magic with him, but I'm worried about ball handlers and facilitators. I'm probably clouded by the decade of Beilein, but having four guys (Wagner, Livers, Johns, Teske) who are shot takers and not creators seems unlikely.
Then again, my assumption is that Brooks or one of the other guards will earn their 20 minutes and starting spot......who knows?
Johns is such an amazing athlete. He just has no skill (or shown any). Maybe its the B-Line big man development excuse. Maybe not. But man, the dude is a pure athlete.
I still think it will click for him. I just don't know when. Great test for Howards big man development.
I think you'll be pleasantly surprised by the ball-handling of Livers and Wagner, to start with, and by several of the guys who sat last year. Of course, X has it on a string.
I agree that I don't think there's any way they start Johns and go with such a big lineup, BUT I think Wagner has some ability to create on the wing and Livers showed some flashes of that last year and has perhaps grown into it a bit more.
I think Johns will primarily back up Livers at the four and Brooks will play 20+ min at the two mostly because Wagner is going to be needed at the three most of the game. My best guess right now:
PG: Simpson 32, DeJulius 8
SG: Brooks 24, DeJulius 8, Wagner/Nunez/Bajema 8
SF: Wagner 30, Livers/Bajema 10
PF Livers 28, Johns 12
C: Teske 28, Castleton 12
This is pretty much how I see it, especially early in the season. By B1G season, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Bajema starting at the 2 or getting more minutes there.
i think many folks, including M fans, are underestimating this team. I think we will be pretty equal to last year’s team defensively, better offensively because of better shooting, more depth and as good or better rebounding. Plus, I think there is going to be better chemistry and more passion or “fun” with this team.
Can’t wait.
What about Simpson, Wagner, Livers, Castleton, Teske.
Almost zero chance they'd go EVEN BIGGER and play Castleton and Teske at the same time. Assuming Castleton won't be any better than Teske was last year at shooting threes, there's no way they'd play such a big lineup that lacks shooters AND creators. At least Johns is supposed to be good shooter so he's viable as a stretch four.
I don't think Castleton is that yet, and I don't think Castleton is a guy that can play the four and be able to switch all screens like modern fours have to do. He's going to be a really good five, just like DeJulius is going to be a really good point guard. But they're not going to start and play a lot of minutes until next year, barring injuries. They'll be nice Sophomore backups to all-conference seniors.
with the number of players leaving happy valley, the depth chart (or lack thereof) could be a factor to guys who want early playing time.
Penn State pulled their offer after watching that video. Even that was too creepy for them.
Issues? Nice call by us to a avoid.
Funny, as a Residential College alum I thought it was pretty neat, and regretted we weren't getting him. Doesn't seem like PSU material.
" And hopefully the right tackle is a large upgrade on Juwann Bushell-Beatty."
When it's mid-July and we're still using 'the right tackle' instead of a name, the odds of getting a 'large upgrade' over the previous year are low.
Fall Camp hasn't even started and the BPONE is already omnipresent.
In fairness, outside of 2011-2013, tackle play since Jake Long left has been pretty putrid.
Present yes. Omnipresent nope.
I don't think this is necessarily true. I think it has more to do with the fact that it appears like it could be a close competition between Mayfield and Steuber and both could be quite good.
Mayfield is gonna win the spot and be a big upgrade over JBB with steady growth all season. He is the prototype tackle with frame size feet quickness athleticism and a mean streak.
This is what I think and I want it to be true.
Good points about the baseball schedule.
Instead of moving it 2 weeks, why not 9?
Opening Day: April 9 (the day after the NCAA basketball final)
Conference Season: May 25 to July 20
Conference Tournament: July 24-28
Selection show: July 29
Regionals: August 2-5
Super-Regionals: August 9-12
College World Series: August 17-28 (the day before the NCAA football opener)
There would be at least 3 amazing advantages to this:
(1) Memorial Day series against a nearby rival.
(2) Fourth of July series against another nearby rival, with fireworks after the game
(3) The college world series final would be Monday-Wednesday, August 26-28, with the opening day of college football season on Thursday, August 29. A seamless transition from basketball to baseball to football.
I know the objections (like the MLB draft). They are wrong: the MLB will just have to move their draft to the post-season like all of the other major sports.
Oh, right: move the softball season too.
This is, of course, a magnificent idea. Which is why it will never happen.
This is so crazy it would work. I love that continuous rotation of the 3 major (sorry hockey) sports. Fantastic. The risk is zero. The NCAA makes no money between late June and late August as it is, might as well throw D1 baseball on its own stage.
Well thought out, sir.
Probably because just as northern schools have to deal with miserably cold weather during the spring, southern schools have to deal with miserably hot weather in July and August.
I do agree that 2 weeks probably doesn't move the needle enough. Some, but not enough.
MLB manages to do it
A lot of MLB teams that play in the intense heat of summer have domed stadiums. That is a financial impossibility for college teams.
It's more like a few. Tampa Bay plays indoors. And then Arizona, Houston and Miami (which played outdoors until just a couple years ago) have retractable roofs out of the teams that play in the south. That's it.
If the Atlanta Braves can play outdoors in the heat (which they do) anyone can.
NOTE: Toronto and Milwaukee have retractable roofs but that's cold related more than heat related. And Seattle has a retractable roof for rain.
Is it really a financial impossibility? How much would and indoor stadium cost if it was aimed at being functional not luxurious.
Post season college baseball taking place at the same time as the little league world series? ESPN will not stand for it. That is one of many reasons as to why this will never happen.
except a lot of schools have graduation in early may. do you expect grads to stick around through august? right now, most teams are done in early june.
but for that i like the concept of summer baseball. and this is as good of an idea as any.
This is the reason they'd never do it. Seniors would have to delay their professional plans all summer, underclassmen couldn't do summer internships (assuming some of them do that but maybe they all play baseball all summer anyway?).
They play baseball all summer. One thing this plan would affect is the existing network of wood-bat summer league teams. Duluth has one of them (with two Michigan players on the roster this year!) and that would basically end the team and the league they play in. It’s all college players.
The guys with legit pro prospects do, the rest of the team uses the summer to take classes, and many of those guys who are playing summer ball are taking distance education courses. The way spring college ball schedule works is you're playing Tuesday/Wednesday, then Friday-Sunday, so everyone is on the minimum levels of coursework for spring.
It doesn't work because the only reason the College playoffs get to be on TV is because they're timed to play during the period in the summer when there's nothing happening. You start backing up closer to football season's start and MLB's pennant race season and you just cut the value of the only thing valuable about college baseball. If you start making the college baseball season something that eats into the time ESPN would otherwise be all hands on deck previewing for the thing that actually makes them money, you increase the odds ESPN just goes "nah" and then the sport's dead.
On top of that, your baseball season now includes the spring term, all of the summer term and if you make it all the way, into the beginning of the fall term. When exactly do you expect any baseball players to take classes? This isn't a heavy revenue sport, and a large percentage of college baseball players won't make it, they have to be actual students.
A time is gonna have to come where folks like Brian realize that the entire baseball schedule cannot be oriented around a region of the country that largely sucks at baseball. Kids from northern states who show tremendous promise at baseball usually end up moving south for high school to play more year round, which means they end up being in the southern college's backyards for college. All these torturous attempts to "fix" college baseball basically amount to "hey let's change college hockey so its fairer for Arizona State!" It's silly. High school kids in Michigan basically play the exact same schedule as college, it's just shorter because it starts a month later. If you want to play in some bo-bo league where things like this year's Michigan run are impossible, be my guest, but it's pretty lame.
That video was some David Lynch shit.
Wow, indeed. Minus the Aaliyah track...that was a weird choice.
The one thing that troubles me about giving the players name and image rights is that while it will mean a lot for certain players, it will mean nothing for others. Everyone on the team has to work as hard as everyone else. There ought to be a system that rewards the fairly anonymous offensive lineman or nose tackle who is putting in the same time and effort as the star QB or RB. Why not have a system where everyone on the team gets a monthly cash stipend in addition to tuition and room and board? Every college kid needs money for miscellaneous things. Clothes. Pizza. Beer. Entertainment. Date money. Gas. Whatever. Why shouldn’t that be a part of a “full ride” scholarship at a school?
They can make as much as the market will pay them. A loosening of NIL rights probably reduces restrictions on "easy jobs" as well (getting paid because of one's prominence as an athlete will be legal) and they can do whatever they can to make cash.
They already get tuition, room, board, and a cost of living stipend. But, frankly, a backup TE who can't see the field doesn't have a claim to deserve the same money as Trevor Lawrence.
I think your last paragraph is why coaches historically have been opposed to players getting NIL rights. That backup TE is expected to put in the same level and effort of work regardless of how much he can make. The combination of expectations from the coaches with the reality of capitalism will lead to a much harder team to manage. This is not hypothetical. This happens in pro sports all the time, especially the NBA. Many a good team was broken up because of jealousy amongst teammates.
The envy point is a legitimate concern of mine, as is the possibility of weaker programs simply withering away and dying. As Carpetbagger noted below though, I think one solution to mitigate this could be to create some type of collective bargaining agreement and/or shared pool of resources.
Most or all of the pro leagues are not 100% free market & they use some of the regulations to help boost the smaller markets. Hell, the current NCAA conferences ALREADY do this in the form of TV/media revenue sharing. The superstar schools get the eyeballs & boost the profitability of the conferences, then a certain % of the pool gets shared with the bottom feeders of the conference.
There's no reason why this couldn't be done on a team or conference level to create a bigger uniform annual stipdend for both revenue & possibly non-revenue athletes.
Example: Allow superstar athletes to make as much damned money as they want in NIL deals, but they need to report it & pay taxes like normal citizens. A formula would be developed at the NCAA level where a certain chunk of those earnings would be dumped into the community athlete pool to be shared within the NCAA DI teams, within the conference, within the team, etc.. After all, "you didn't build that"--a significant reason the individual kid is able to earn that much in NIL fees is that the school/NCAA is providing the platform & infrastructure for them to showcase their talents. The rest of the earnings would be retained & used by the individual athlete immediately. If people don't want the social & toxic issues that may crop up with Trevor Lawrence driving a Ferrari around campus, park that portion of the earnings into an individual escrow account while the player is still enrolled & playing for the school. While enrolled & on the team, the individual high earning athlete just takes a standard uniform draw (presumably now at least moderatly bigger than today's stipends-certainly enough daily "walking around money" for beer/gas/groceries/clothes/date night for the average college kid) from the community stipend pool like everybody else. Once the kid is no longer enrolled/playing/exhausted NCAA eligiblity/medically retires, they cash out their individual escrow account to spend as they see fit.
Yes, issues would still crop up.
A huge fight would be had over how the formula breaks down. Do all athletes dump into a common pool for ALL NCAA D1 athletes (revenue & non-revenue alike)? Is the pool for ALL NCAA D1 athletes, but only in that particular sport? Is the pool shared between conferences? Are there individual pools for each school/team?
A high earning athlete may get resentful at having to drop a certain % into the community stipend pool that the 4th string special teams gets to also use. They may chaffe at the paternalistic escrowing of their individually vested share until they graduate, exhaust their NCAA eligibilty, medically retire, etc.
Individual athletes or boosters would try to cheat the system by under-reporting earnings to skim off the top & avoid donating to the community stipend pool. If there are earnings limits in the formula that are significantly under normal market-value, bag-men will steer the extra cash to star players under the table. Or players will try to put up their escrow as collateral to get cash advances in a JG Wentworth sort of way.
But on the whole, those problems strike me as minor compared to the gross injustice that is going on now where serial cheaters are rewarded for their behavior due to NCAA non-enforcement, rule following schools are punished by their self-policing, and all the kids are getting vastly under-compensated.
Pretty sure the write up states they "play for free"...with it implied that they are also voting to get rid of offsides in hockey.
/s
I have a feeling those most advocating for the players to get paid (like college tuition at a place like Michigan, not to mention room and board isn't being paid already) are going to regret the fallout when it happens.
When colleges throughout the country start cutting non-revenue sports to compensate for the money they are losing to the superstar athletes, how long can those sports even survive as leagues? Sure Michigan has a money cannon, but how long before most of the other hockey schools give it up as non-competitive and expensive?
There is a reason almost all sports have some sort of CBA it's to keep the weaker teams/frnachises alive, not the stronger.
This system needs fixing. There are way too many talking heads and bureaucrats making way too money, but that's universities in general, not just athletics.
To build on this, can you imagine how busy the transfer portal will be when your playing time can directly correlate to how much you can earn?
I'm sure this board will be very kind and supportive to every player who wants to leave to get paid now instead of sticking it out.
Transfer portal would be crazy if NIL & other financial incentives were legitimized & made more common. However, some things could be made to alieviate that problem:
- Shared athlete stipend pool I mentioned in a post somewhere else in this thread. If large enough, the non or low individual earners may not have huge incentive to move to make an extra 10% or 20% per year if they've already bonded with their team, etc.
- If players earn NIL revenue from local boosters, car dealers, restaurant chains, etc., they could put into the contracts that some of the deferred earnings get forefited if the athlete transfers to another school, etc.
- Profitability/fame at the college level may be more highly linked to being known locally. A kid might be taking a big risk at departing a campus he's been known at for few years just to marginally increase their earnings in their last one or two years. As a result, the profit differential might have to be significant to creatve an incentive to take the risk.
- It'd be unpopular, but the NCAA could allow NIL deals/stipend formulas as a carrot in exchange for tightening the transfer rules again. Less fluidity of movement in the market, but more abiltiy to make money where you go.
You have a good point about the viability of smaller-market schools. So, I think any reforms--NIL or otherwise--likley would still not shift 100% to a free market system, but have some type of reserve revenue sharing pool to subsidize the smaller schools.
However, I think it is important to distinguish between schools directly paying players versus allowing NIL endorsement revenue to flow to players. Theoretically, allowing NIL revenue does not directly impact the AD budgets as it would not be the schools that would be paying the athletes. It'd be flowing from 3rd parties like local/regional/national corporations, etc.
Of course, the core issue would be whether in certain circumstances it impacts AD budgets/teams INDIRECTLY. It's hard to tell right & would probably be a case-by-case basis.
It's possible that most money for NIL endorsement deals would largely come from "new" money flowing into the system. For example, the metro-area pizza chain, local car dealer, etc. starts directing money they'd normally spend elsewhere towards advertising/marketing using NIL endorsement deals to star university football/basketball players.
It's also possible that a sizable % of NIL endorsement money flowing to college athletes would be "old"/"recycled" money currently in the system. For example, maybe the SEC bagmen simply start to flow most or all of their money to players above the table instead of under it. Most of them are probably wealthy local business owners anyway. Alternatively, non-revenue sports could suffer if the NIL endorsement money flowing to football/basketball stars come from alum/athletic boosters who ALREADY donate that money to the schools in legitimate ways. For example, rich would-be bagman isn't willing to cut ethical corners by being a bagman, so instead cuts a $500K donation check to the sparkling new women's softball field, or to the palacial weight/nutrition center for student athletes, etc.
Either way though ("new" money flowing in or "old money" being redirected), I still think it's an improvement. New money is new money, so everybody within the university/NCAA athletic system wins. NCAA/ADs keep their low overhead b/c outsiders are subsidizing it, and athletes now get paid--if not exactly market value--at least something closer to it. Old money that is redirected at least shows an accurate representation of what the donors actually value MOST. Thus, it might incentivize them to donate more, since the end-result isn't a secondary or even tertiary use of their money. The cash can be 100% directed to what they *really* care about, rather than having to go through a Kabuki theater act of donating to some tangentially related issue & hoping that the fungible nature of money creates an indirect benefit to the players.
They do receive stipens to pay for some living expenses. College athletes get plenty they don’t need to be paid for a college sport. If it’s too much for them then don’t play and pay your way through college like most students. If you look at everything college athletes get for a sport you don’t need to also pay them. They are compensated plenty for being an athlete
From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.
Ignore this post if you're not interested in a rant about the NCAA.
Instead of looking at NIL (or any other compensation vehicle) as an educational opportunity (it most certainly is) the NCAA and its commissioners and members are grasping at an outdated notion of amateurism and hypocritically pretending pay-to-play (or at least pay to commit) doesn't already exist.
IF the NCAA truly wants to be an educational institution (it does not) they should be looking at this as an opportunity. They should establish prerequisites and conditions for the receipt of compensation, including business and accounting courses, marketing courses, the establishment of a trust to help players maximize the impact of the income, mentorship, and other obvious financial and management tools that could actually help players not only profit in terms of dollars, but actually learn how business works so that if they don't end-up in the NFL (or even if they do) they can effectively market themselves and they have a foundational understanding of finance.
Putting out an RFP to the member institutions for best ideas on a curriculum would be the best and easiest way to build a program that helped student-athletes prosper on the field and off.
Everyone can win here. The NCAA pretending pure amateurism is a thing (at least in the revenue sports) is both laughably hypocritical and anti-educational. DO YOUR JOB and help these kids learn business and life skills through a common sense program attached to the compensation vehicle.
Isn't this what the school is already doing? Can't any athlete major in business with a focus on marketing if they want to? Why create a special major/class just for athletes? That seems more detrimental than getting an overall business degree.
Why should an athlete be forced to take accounting and marketing courses just to receive compensation? Isn't a logical extension of that argument that everyone in college should be required to take those course since everyone (or at least a vast majority) will eventually receive some compensation (just not for athletics).
Comments