Moderator: JdPat04
CraigKressel wrote:Jezter13 wrote:This thread is kind of funny when reading through it and looking at the political points you make on the G.D. board.
It's like someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder.
The majority of you hate "libtards" and rail against that agenda. Yet, here you are braying as leftist/totalitarians do when anyone wants to break rank from their plantation.
A kid sees an opportunity to make money. Free Market Capitalism, something you all seem to agree with, but not when it comes to your slaves being involved.
It's quite weird.
You can do things to make it better and better for the players.
1. Bring back the video game and start paying players for sales of jerseys and video games etc, just divide the profits equally among them in stipends.
2. Let them sign autographs for money a couple of times a year just cap it.
3. Let them get a sponsor capped at 20k a year that is NCAA approved.
The colleges don't even have to pay the players just let them profit off of it in their own way.
CraigKressel wrote:I'm waiting for the year Bama happens to not make the playoffs I bet they will have 10 players sit out.
JdPat04 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:I'm waiting for the year Bama happens to not make the playoffs I bet they will have 10 players sit out.
We won’t find out for a long time considering you said we have a free ride every year. :chewy
JdPat04 wrote:You’re a stupid fuck.
We have home and homes scheduled and played them before under Saban and he wants 9 SEC games
Jezter13 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Jezter13 wrote:This thread is kind of funny when reading through it and looking at the political points you make on the G.D. board.
It's like someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder.
The majority of you hate "libtards" and rail against that agenda. Yet, here you are braying as leftist/totalitarians do when anyone wants to break rank from their plantation.
A kid sees an opportunity to make money. Free Market Capitalism, something you all seem to agree with, but not when it comes to your slaves being involved.
It's quite weird.
You can do things to make it better and better for the players.
1. Bring back the video game and start paying players for sales of jerseys and video games etc, just divide the profits equally among them in stipends.
2. Let them sign autographs for money a couple of times a year just cap it.
3. Let them get a sponsor capped at 20k a year that is NCAA approved.
The colleges don't even have to pay the players just let them profit off of it in their own way.
In order to have a conversation about this
1. You have to understand what the NCAA is.
2. Understand how the Athletic Department works
3. Be willing to realise that the money made in college for football is greater than the NFL.
4. Why are you against kids making money? Do you feel the same for child actors?
5. Do you understand affiliation vs. Likeness vs. Ownership?
Now, your three points should be included in players rights and monetary gain not the sole basis. No different than the NFL.
'bigbluebazooka wrote:Jezter13 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Jezter13 wrote:This thread is kind of funny when reading through it and looking at the political points you make on the G.D. board.
It's like someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder.
The majority of you hate "libtards" and rail against that agenda. Yet, here you are braying as leftist/totalitarians do when anyone wants to break rank from their plantation.
A kid sees an opportunity to make money. Free Market Capitalism, something you all seem to agree with, but not when it comes to your slaves being involved.
It's quite weird.
You can do things to make it better and better for the players.
1. Bring back the video game and start paying players for sales of jerseys and video games etc, just divide the profits equally among them in stipends.
2. Let them sign autographs for money a couple of times a year just cap it.
3. Let them get a sponsor capped at 20k a year that is NCAA approved.
The colleges don't even have to pay the players just let them profit off of it in their own way.
In order to have a conversation about this
1. You have to understand what the NCAA is.
2. Understand how the Athletic Department works
3. Be willing to realise that the money made in college for football is greater than the NFL.
4. Why are you against kids making money? Do you feel the same for child actors?
5. Do you understand affiliation vs. Likeness vs. Ownership?
Now, your three points should be included in players rights and monetary gain not the sole basis. No different than the NFL.
The problem is the NCAA has no competition. Basketball you have options. Football you don’t. You can go pro in baseball right out of high school.
CraigKressel wrote:'bigbluebazooka wrote:Jezter13 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Jezter13 wrote:This thread is kind of funny when reading through it and looking at the political points you make on the G.D. board.
It's like someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder.
The majority of you hate "libtards" and rail against that agenda. Yet, here you are braying as leftist/totalitarians do when anyone wants to break rank from their plantation.
A kid sees an opportunity to make money. Free Market Capitalism, something you all seem to agree with, but not when it comes to your slaves being involved.
It's quite weird.
You can do things to make it better and better for the players.
1. Bring back the video game and start paying players for sales of jerseys and video games etc, just divide the profits equally among them in stipends.
2. Let them sign autographs for money a couple of times a year just cap it.
3. Let them get a sponsor capped at 20k a year that is NCAA approved.
The colleges don't even have to pay the players just let them profit off of it in their own way.
In order to have a conversation about this
1. You have to understand what the NCAA is.
2. Understand how the Athletic Department works
3. Be willing to realise that the money made in college for football is greater than the NFL.
4. Why are you against kids making money? Do you feel the same for child actors?
5. Do you understand affiliation vs. Likeness vs. Ownership?
Now, your three points should be included in players rights and monetary gain not the sole basis. No different than the NFL.
The problem is the NCAA has no competition. Basketball you have options. Football you don’t. You can go pro in baseball right out of high school.
They are amateur athletes and a lot of the money goes to fund other things unlike the NFL. So I think just allowing the players to profit some and giving them a small cut of some things would be fair. They do get paid a scholarship and most players on scholarship are not worth that money. So lets say a player like Bosa gets paid his scholarship which is like 40k a year or so then hes allowed to make 20k a year on a sponsor then he is allowed to get 20k in autographs or something and then is paid 5k in likeness stipends then he could be making close to 100k a year worth from playing there.
I think that would be fair enough and if they sit out a game without being injured or quit the team they have to pay it back for that year, I think that would be enough incentive that the players don't just quit, because I am sure most of them it is already a tough decision for them.
Jezter13 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:'bigbluebazooka wrote:Jezter13 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Jezter13 wrote:This thread is kind of funny when reading through it and looking at the political points you make on the G.D. board.
It's like someone suffering from Multiple Personality Disorder.
The majority of you hate "libtards" and rail against that agenda. Yet, here you are braying as leftist/totalitarians do when anyone wants to break rank from their plantation.
A kid sees an opportunity to make money. Free Market Capitalism, something you all seem to agree with, but not when it comes to your slaves being involved.
It's quite weird.
You can do things to make it better and better for the players.
1. Bring back the video game and start paying players for sales of jerseys and video games etc, just divide the profits equally among them in stipends.
2. Let them sign autographs for money a couple of times a year just cap it.
3. Let them get a sponsor capped at 20k a year that is NCAA approved.
The colleges don't even have to pay the players just let them profit off of it in their own way.
In order to have a conversation about this
1. You have to understand what the NCAA is.
2. Understand how the Athletic Department works
3. Be willing to realise that the money made in college for football is greater than the NFL.
4. Why are you against kids making money? Do you feel the same for child actors?
5. Do you understand affiliation vs. Likeness vs. Ownership?
Now, your three points should be included in players rights and monetary gain not the sole basis. No different than the NFL.
The problem is the NCAA has no competition. Basketball you have options. Football you don’t. You can go pro in baseball right out of high school.
They are amateur athletes and a lot of the money goes to fund other things unlike the NFL. So I think just allowing the players to profit some and giving them a small cut of some things would be fair. They do get paid a scholarship and most players on scholarship are not worth that money. So lets say a player like Bosa gets paid his scholarship which is like 40k a year or so then hes allowed to make 20k a year on a sponsor then he is allowed to get 20k in autographs or something and then is paid 5k in likeness stipends then he could be making close to 100k a year worth from playing there.
I think that would be fair enough and if they sit out a game without being injured or quit the team they have to pay it back for that year, I think that would be enough incentive that the players don't just quit, because I am sure most of them it is already a tough decision for them.
This is the absolute stupidest argument i have ever heard
Bosa is worth millions of dollars right now. He was worth that much last year too, but the NFL rules don't allow for him to enter the league until being 3 years removed from HS and or 21 years old.
Let's look at the two QB's playing tonight. Do you think that shit scholarship is worth it to them? They're forced to play here, as slaves were poked and prodded before sale, until ready to get paid.
The term amateur is Bull-Shit. Because other amateur leagues get paid. So, that dog doesnt hunt.
Do you work for free?
And calling them quitters is a garbage stance. Their Willis Mcgahee lost a lot of money due to that injury. As did the kid from notre Shame a couple of years ago.
Let's look at Haskins, had he decided to stay another year and played lights out. He's a top 10 pick. Why should he risk that? For $40K?! You really think forcing them to pay that back would be a bad trade off to ensure their health and money?
This is such a dumb argument. I can't believe it's even happening.
CraigKressel wrote:Ohio State by comparison has 9 conference games next year so that is already equal then in 2020 Oregon at Oregon plus 9 conference games 2021 Oregon at home with 9 conference games 2022 Notre Dame at home then 2023 ND on the road.
Really you guys should be playing 2 power 5 teams OOC since you only play 8 conference games and both should be home and away instead you guys do 1 neutral site then 3 cupcakes.
JdPat04 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Ohio State by comparison has 9 conference games next year so that is already equal then in 2020 Oregon at Oregon plus 9 conference games 2021 Oregon at home with 9 conference games 2022 Notre Dame at home then 2023 ND on the road.
Really you guys should be playing 2 power 5 teams OOC since you only play 8 conference games and both should be home and away instead you guys do 1 neutral site then 3 cupcakes.
Nobody gives a shit. You tried to claim that Saban and Alabama didn’t play away games, they do and are.
You claimed Saban was for the easiest path but he wants 9 SEC games.
Just as always you claim shit that isn’t true
Jezter13 wrote:I already gave a brief synopsis on page 1 on some easy solutions
College football, as it's set up, is antiquated.
I understand you believe these kids are here for your entertainment but they deserve to be treated fairly.
Simple, do you get paid to do your job or are you working at the highest levels of your chosen profession as nothing more than an intern?
CraigKressel wrote:JdPat04 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Ohio State by comparison has 9 conference games next year so that is already equal then in 2020 Oregon at Oregon plus 9 conference games 2021 Oregon at home with 9 conference games 2022 Notre Dame at home then 2023 ND on the road.
Really you guys should be playing 2 power 5 teams OOC since you only play 8 conference games and both should be home and away instead you guys do 1 neutral site then 3 cupcakes.
Nobody gives a shit. You tried to claim that Saban and Alabama didn’t play away games, they do and are.
You claimed Saban was for the easiest path but he wants 9 SEC games.
Just as always you claim shit that isn’t true
What OOC away game? I still haven't seen any when is the last time that they played 1 and when do they play 1 again?
JdPat04 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:JdPat04 wrote:CraigKressel wrote:Ohio State by comparison has 9 conference games next year so that is already equal then in 2020 Oregon at Oregon plus 9 conference games 2021 Oregon at home with 9 conference games 2022 Notre Dame at home then 2023 ND on the road.
Really you guys should be playing 2 power 5 teams OOC since you only play 8 conference games and both should be home and away instead you guys do 1 neutral site then 3 cupcakes.
Nobody gives a shit. You tried to claim that Saban and Alabama didn’t play away games, they do and are.
You claimed Saban was for the easiest path but he wants 9 SEC games.
Just as always you claim shit that isn’t true
What OOC away game? I still haven't seen any when is the last time that they played 1 and when do they play 1 again?
Under Saban? Google it. You are making the baseless claims.
Google our future OOC opponents as well and you’ll see our future home and homes as well.
He also is for 9 games but you claimed he wants the easier. Ignore that fact.
Here you go too. Just found this on Reddit
Where do schools rank over the last 20 years based on Sargarins SoS?
JdPat04 wrote:Interesting tidbit
Schools who didn’t place in the top 65 in the 20 year period.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 370 guests