VC Transfers

[Columbuseer]

This donation issue is quite interesting, complete with scandals and intrigue. Mega donors give to a college foundation which is a separate from college and is private, which protects it from FOI requests. Mega donors get to have strings attached to their gift. In the case of george mason univ., koch foundation had input into faculty hiring!

very interesting.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/theconv...-secret-129309

[Fightingscot82]

I considered endowing a scholarship in my fathers name...YES, you need a lawyer to decipher the agreement. The general premise revolves around "as near as possible." The school will only agree to using the funds you provide to them as nearly as possible for the purpose you gave it to them for. Soooo...If you gave the money for the purpose of funding a basketball scholly and the school does away with basketball, it is up to the college to determine the future use of the dollars.

Was it with West Liberty? Because there may be some legal precedent in WV (or wherever). My family has an endowment at Edinboro and the agreement specifically states that the money can only be used for the intended purpose and if they can't honor the criteria the endowment principal can be returned to us upon our request. But that endowment sits with the university's foundation, a legally separate 501c3 so maybe that's why. Fortunately we also have it in writing that the endowment will only be used to benefit a student attending the Edinboro campus of whatever the new forced merger entity is. We're not paying for some Yinzerella attending Cal U.

[boatcapt]

Was it with West Liberty? Because there may be some legal precedent in WV (or wherever). My family has an endowment at Edinboro and the agreement specifically states that the money can only be used for the intended purpose and if they can't honor the criteria the endowment principal can be returned to us upon our request. But that endowment sits with the university's foundation, a legally separate 501c3 so maybe that's why. Fortunately we also have it in writing that the endowment will only be used to benefit a student attending the Edinboro campus of whatever the new forced merger entity is. We're not paying for some Yinzerella attending Cal U.

Wasn't WLU, it was the Univ of MD but I get your premise. It was an endowment to the Univ and not a separate entity/foundation.

[Fightingscot82]

Wasn't WLU, it was the Univ of MD but I get your premise. It was an endowment to the Univ and not a separate entity/foundation.

I dabbled in university fundraising but did annual gifts rather than "major" gifts. I guess the university needs to know what to do with your money when they don't have someone that meets the criteria.

[Columbuseer]

Everyone seems to be focusing on CTE as a solely football related injury. I remember reading a study a couple years ago that compared HIE among a number of sports and activities engaged in by adolecents. Study found that the most dangerous activity was skateboarding followed by wrestling, soccer, football and basketball. As I said at the time on this board, the focus on football is driven by the deep pockets of persons, teams and companies involved in football...Not going to generate much media attention or $'s from suing Anti-Hero Skateboard Company for your clients CTE buuutttt...If that same client ALSO played HS football, you'll get a LOT more attention by suing the School District and Nike for the CTE related to the same persons football playing.

Here is a study from a reputable source American Associations of neurosurgeons: https://www.aans.org/Patients/Neuros...ed-Head-Injury


It suggests that CTE is a significant risk in football and is not solely driven by lawyers chasing deep pockets.

Some Excerpts:

"A research study conducted in 2017 at Boston University examined 202 brains from deceased football players and found that 177 of them (87%) had signs of chronic traumatic encephalopathy from repeated blows to the head"


Skateboarding has 1/10 the number of injuries as football.


"The top 10 sports-related head injury categories among children ages 14 and younger:

• Playground Equipment: 35,058
• Football: 31,277
• Basketball: 20,242
• Cycling: 19,921
• Baseball and Softball: 12,065
• Soccer: 12,709
• Swimming: 9,265
• Trampolines: 7,921
• Powered Recreational Vehicles: 6,036
• Skateboards: 3,101. "

[IUP24]

Just a followup on hours spent by d1 athletes. Total time is more than team time.
Source: https://www.ncpanow.org/solutions-an...rces/academics

All valid data. This is probably a shrewd response, but nobody forces anybody to play collegiate sports. Total time is most certainly more than team time. But that similarly applies to any individual with additional responsibilities. There's college students working 40 hours a week while also taking a near full course-load, and they aren't getting tuition reduction from athletic scholarships. They graduate in debt, worked just as hard, but didn't play baseball, soccer, etc.

College is hard for those who choose to major in something other than basket weaving. It takes work to thrive and succeed academically, much like in athletics. People know what they sign up for when they decide to play a sport. You get a lot of perks playing at a major D1 school. I don't feel bad for college athletes at major universities. They have a far greater deal than people care to realize or acknowledge.

[Columbuseer]

All valid data. This is probably a shrewd response, but nobody forces anybody to play collegiate sports. Total time is most certainly more than team time. But that similarly applies to any individual with additional responsibilities. There's college students working 40 hours a week while also taking a near full course-load, and they aren't getting tuition reduction from athletic scholarships. They graduate in debt, worked just as hard, but didn't play baseball, soccer, etc.

College is hard for those who choose to major in something other than basket weaving. It takes work to thrive and succeed academically, much like in athletics. People know what they sign up for when they decide to play a sport. You get a lot of perks playing at a major D1 school. I don't feel bad for college athletes at major universities. They have a far greater deal than people care to realize or acknowledge.

"nobody forces anybody to play collegiate sports" - not attacking you, but I have heard this said by others to rationalize exploitation.

• nobody forces anyone to work in a coal mine and get black lung.
• They are better off than where they would have been...
• Nobody forces Indonesians to work in brutal sweatshop conditions and live in debt and squalor making athletic gear that NBA stars get paid millions to endorse (which is incredible irony). I suggest viewing the documentary "Swooshed". Things have not significantly changed. Labor AND materials cost is about $3.00 on a $100 athletic shoe. Source: https://www.sneakerfactory.net/2019/...ake-a-sneaker/

"anecdotal evidence of folks working 40 hrs..."

• From personal experience, there are very few who can major in pre med, comp science, physics, hard sciences or engineering that can work 40 hrs and go to school full time. 15 hrs a week was very challenging and it was not physical work. To their credit, they would not let me work during finals week.
• Hopefully, their parents did not encourage them to change their major so they could work more, like the d1 coaches.
• If working 40 hrs instead of getting loans results in a 2.9 GPA instead of a 3.6 GPA, then it is a really bad choice. That is similar to the impact on d1 athletes.

The 2015 NCAA Goals study indicates to me that d1 college athletics is academic fraud, and is limiting the academic potential of the athletes. What right does a coach have to tell a player what can or cannot be their major?

https://www.ncpanow.org/solutions-an...rces/academics

[IUP24]

"nobody forces anybody to play collegiate sports" - not attacking you, but I have heard this said by others to rationalize exploitation.

• nobody forces anyone to work in a coal mine and get black lung.
• They are better off than where they would have been...
• Nobody forces Indonesians to work in brutal sweatshop conditions and live in debt and squalor making athletic gear that NBA stars get paid millions to endorse (which is incredible irony). I suggest viewing the documentary "Swooshed". Things have not significantly changed. Labor AND materials cost is about $3.00 on a $100 athletic shoe. Source: https://www.sneakerfactory.net/2019/...ake-a-sneaker/

"anecdotal evidence of folks working 40 hrs..."

• From personal experience, there are very few who can major in pre med, comp science, physics, hard sciences or engineering that can work 40 hrs and go to school full time. 15 hrs a week was very challenging and it was not physical work. To their credit, they would not let me work during finals week.
• Hopefully, their parents did not encourage them to change their major so they could work more, like the d1 coaches.
• If working 40 hrs instead of getting loans results in a 2.9 GPA instead of a 3.6 GPA, then it is a really bad choice. That is similar to the impact on d1 athletes.

The 2015 NCAA Goals study indicates to me that d1 college athletics is academic fraud, and is limiting the academic potential of the athletes. What right does a coach have to tell a player what can or cannot be their major?

https://www.ncpanow.org/solutions-an...rces/academics

[Columbuseer]

Agree with you philosophically about being free to choose. However, I am not sure athletes
understand what they are getting into. Is there a handbook that says "there are some majors that are off limits for d1 athletes as well as the other facts in the 2015 ncaa study? I certainly was not aware.

Athletes do get extra perks, most of which are focused on keeping them eligible to feed the d1 money machine and not some reward for the athlete.

I just don't understand acceptance of obvious exploitation. I just want it to be a level playing field academically and athletically.

• 5 star athlete should be able to play in NFL, but that door is closed if they cannot pass lowered admission standards for college. That is restraint of trade and is not freedom to choose.
• Let's stop the hypocrisy and acknowledge that d1 is the minor leagues for football and basketball. Let them play 5 yrs with no college attendance required. Then pay for their education afterwards , whether it college or trade schools to get a middle class job.

[boatcapt]

Agree with you philosophically about being free to choose. However, I am not sure athletes
understand what they are getting into. Is there a handbook that says "there are some majors that are off limits for d1 athletes as well as the other facts in the 2015 ncaa study? I certainly was not aware.

Athletes do get extra perks, most of which are focused on keeping them eligible to feed the d1 money machine and not some reward for the athlete.

I just don't understand acceptance of obvious exploitation. I just want it to be a level playing field academically and athletically.

• 5 star athlete should be able to play in NFL, but that door is closed if they cannot pass lowered admission standards for college. That is restraint of trade and is not freedom to choose.
• Let's stop the hypocrisy and acknowledge that d1 is the minor leagues for football and basketball. Let them play 5 yrs with no college attendance required. Then pay for their education afterwards , whether it college or trade schools to get a middle class job.

People make decisions in life. Often, those decisions have financial implications, I made a financial decision when I first went to college. I could have chosen to go straight into the work force out of HS and made more $'s than I did as a college student but I felt it was in my best long term financial advantage to go to college (on my own dime). The school I went to was very well endowed and if they chose to, they could have paid the tuition of every student. But that's not how the system works. The school earned a financial benefit from me and the other students going there so I suppose we could have taken them to court and asked for a portion of the financial benefit we provided to the school.

Concerning age restrictions, I would point out that the NFL is a private company and within limits, they can set what ever restrictions they believe are in its best interest. I would also note that the government itself levies age restrictions on a hoste of jobs and industries and they also place hour restrictions based on age. I don't think that is restraint of trade. No matter how capable a 17 year old may be at it or how much they may want to do it, they can' have jobs in, for example:

Woodworking using power driven machinery,
Driving a motor vehicle,
Manufacturing bricks or tiles,
Forestry,
Roofing,
Operating bakery equipment.

And several more areas. Is that restraint of trade?

I also note that there a number of positions were there is a MAXIMUM age.

[Columbuseer]

Let me clarify the restraint of trade argument.

Unlike hazardous jobs like coal mining, the only thing determining whether one 5 star athlete plays quality (D1 level) football after high school and another 5 star athlete not playing quality football after high school is high school GPA, SAT and ACT scores.

The reason is purely based on tradition, before pro sports exploded into a multi billion $ business. The NCAA wants to maintain a monopoly.
So a gifted athlete misses out on a chance (much better than lottery but guesstimate maybe 1% for a 5 star) for million $ career in NFL because of tradition.

The situation is really quite silly. "Mr. Sinatra, you have a great voice but we cannot let you sing in our big band because you did not graduate from high school." Lol

I am a free market guy too. Supply and demand should dictate the wages and benefits of great athletes.if you want a five star athlete, offer more $. The SEC is just ahead of the curve lol.
Ncaa acts as anti free market in fixing wages and benefits, this is a free country right?

To put succinctly, "there is no relationship between academics and whether you can make a tackler miss in the open field."

[Fightingscot82]

Let me clarify the restraint of trade argument.

Unlike hazardous jobs like coal mining, the only thing determining whether one 5 star athlete plays quality (D1 level) football after high school and another 5 star athlete not playing quality football after high school is high school GPA, SAT and ACT scores.

The reason is purely based on tradition, before pro sports exploded into a multi billion $ business. The NCAA wants to maintain a monopoly.
So a gifted athlete misses out on a chance (much better than lottery but guesstimate maybe 1% for a 5 star) for million $ career in NFL because of tradition.

The situation is really quite silly. "Mr. Sinatra, you have a great voice but we cannot let you sing in our big band because you did not graduate from high school." Lol

I am a free market guy too. Supply and demand should dictate the wages and benefits of great athletes.if you want a five star athlete, offer more $. The SEC is just ahead of the curve lol.
Ncaa acts as anti free market in fixing wages and benefits, this is a free country right?

To put succinctly, "there is no relationship between academics and whether you can make a tackler miss in the open field."

No, the NCAA governs amateur athletics. Schools belong to the NCAA and agree to its terms. They don't have to. Its simply amateur vs professional. If Auburn wants to pay its players above a standard stipend they can leave the NCAA.

The NFL is what prevents the 5-star rated high school play from going directly to the NFL, not the NCAA. That 5-star athlete could find a league somewhere to play. Its been done before.

[Columbuseer]

No, the NCAA governs amateur athletics. Schools belong to the NCAA and agree to its terms. They don't have to. Its simply amateur vs professional. If Auburn wants to pay its players above a standard stipend they can leave the NCAA.

The NFL is what prevents the 5-star rated high school play from going directly to the NFL, not the NCAA. That 5-star athlete could find a league somewhere to play. Its been done before.

Over the last 40 years, the NCAA has been losing anti trust litigation, which have resulted in most of the positive changes we have seen to date.

Hard to argue that a $13B yearly business is amateur. Excerpt from usa today article on latest 9-0 defeat. Looks like Auburn can stay after all lol.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against the NCAA in a landmark antitrust case that specifically

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ng/5237656001/

The NFL has had a great gig in avoiding the expense of a farm system. We might see a g league develop like the NBA, which may siphon off the supply of one and dones for Kentucky basketball lol. Imho the farm system would avoid the restraint of trade issue for players who don't qualify for college but need high quality coaching and development to reach the NFL. It is conceivable that many 4 star And 5 stars would opt for the NFL g league rather than make believe college education of D1. Especially if g league supports future education like a gi bill. Ncaa would have no leverage to stop it.


Forbes article from a year ago agrees with restraint of trade and anti-capitalist tendencies of NCAA

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marcede...ust-exemption/

[Fightingscot82]

Over the last 40 years, the NCAA has been losing anti trust litigation, which have resulted in most of the positive changes we have seen to date.

Hard to argue that a $13B yearly business is amateur. Excerpt from usa today article on latest 9-0 defeat. Looks like Auburn can stay after all lol.

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled against the NCAA in a landmark antitrust case that specifically

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...ng/5237656001/

The NFL has had a great gig in avoiding the expense of a farm system. We might see a g league develop like the NBA, which may siphon off the supply of one and dones for Kentucky basketball lol. Imho the farm system would avoid the restraint of trade issue for players who don't qualify for college but need high quality coaching and development to reach the NFL. It is conceivable that many 4 star And 5 stars would opt for the NFL g league rather than make believe college education of D1. Especially if g league supports future education like a gi bill. Ncaa would have no leverage to stop it.


Forbes article from a year ago agrees with restraint of trade and anti-capitalist tendencies of NCAA

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marcede...ust-exemption/

If higher ed weren't dependent on indirect federal money (student aid) they wouldn't be subject to this. That's the only qualifier. Its not anti-trust because the schools willingly belong to the NCAA. There are NCAA alternatives. The SEC could jump to the NAIA (although they have similar rules). They could form their own league. The NCAA makes very little money on FBS football. These legal arguments are only possible due to the federal funds involved. Athletes are not employees so they're not subject to employment law.

[boatcapt]

Let me clarify the restraint of trade argument.

Unlike hazardous jobs like coal mining, the only thing determining whether one 5 star athlete plays quality (D1 level) football after high school and another 5 star athlete not playing quality football after high school is high school GPA, SAT and ACT scores.

The reason is purely based on tradition, before pro sports exploded into a multi billion $ business. The NCAA wants to maintain a monopoly.
So a gifted athlete misses out on a chance (much better than lottery but guesstimate maybe 1% for a 5 star) for million $ career in NFL because of tradition.

The situation is really quite silly. "Mr. Sinatra, you have a great voice but we cannot let you sing in our big band because you did not graduate from high school." Lol

I am a free market guy too. Supply and demand should dictate the wages and benefits of great athletes.if you want a five star athlete, offer more $. The SEC is just ahead of the curve lol.
Ncaa acts as anti free market in fixing wages and benefits, this is a free country right?

To put succinctly, "there is no relationship between academics and whether you can make a tackler miss in the open field."

Football is not hazardous? That seems to belie all the CTE information you have posted. Seems like every NFL week we see a player carted off the field of play with some sort of serious injury. Also, have you ever seen a retired NFL player who is 50+? Many can hardly walk and it seems like most have had at least one joint replaced. Anacdotal but I worked with at least three former D1 football players and all were in good shape mentally and physically. Granted it is a small sample size but based on this limited observation, seems like playing pro football is very hazardous.