VC Transfers

[Fightingscot82]

Texas-Permian Basin lost 6 players today. Y-I-K-E-S

[boatcapt]

Lol good one. I should have been clearer. Many jobs have age limit rules for safety reasons, like joining army, power woodworking equipment etc. All rational reasons. Only ncaa football uses irrelevant considerations like GPA and SAT. That was distinction i was trying to make, not that football was not hazardous.
"there is no relationship between academics and whether you can make a tackler miss in the open field."

Well...I think most schools still use HS GPA and SAT scores for academic admissions consideration. Colleges and Employeers use test results all the times to make admission and hiring decisions...Try getting into law school with a bad LSAT...Take the MCAT and score porly and see how that works out for you getting into Medical School. Heck...Score low on the ASVAB and see what military jobs are open to you.

[boatcapt]

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

I would point out that this probably happens all the time and across the spectrum of political leanings.

Seem to be talking about the Univ of MD a lot lately but I recall a number of years ago the head football coach, Ralph Friedgen, was fired amid pressure by MD's unicorn donor Kevin Plank the CEO of Under Armor. Plank, a graduate and former player for UofM, had UA sponsor the UofM and wanted a more photogenic coach to run in the "We Must Protect This House" commercials.

[boatcapt]

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.

Contained in the agreement was language that delt with what the college would do with the funds if the specific intended purpose was not available. Language said that in the case of the specific intended purpose of the donation not being available, the school would take steps to align the distribution as nearly as possible with the original purpose. As explained to me, if the school was unable to determine a qualified recipient of the scholarship, they could reallocate that scholarship to a similar scholarship program. My fathers scholarship was to be in the field of Electrical Engineering...If no one applied OR if no applicant qualified OR if the school ever did away with the Electrical Engineering program, the school could realign the scholly to say, the Mechanical Engineering program.

[Columbuseer]

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.

I can find nothing in scus syllabus to support your statement about fed money. Ncaa is a cartel with voluntary members, which scus shot down as irrelevant. If u find a reference in opinion below let me know.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...4ldE2sSYm9v27O

The scope of the ruling only applies to educational benefits that cannot be mandated. The concern is that the addition of educational benefits will make them employees. Lawsuits are just starting.

National law review on what is next:

https://www.natlawreview.com/article...at-s-next-ncaa

[Columbuseer]

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.

Lol good one. I should have been clearer. Many jobs have age limit rules for safety reasons, like joining army, power woodworking equipment etc. All rational reasons. Only ncaa football uses irrelevant considerations like GPA and SAT. That was distinction i was trying to make, not that football was not hazardous.
"there is no relationship between academics and whether you can make a tackler miss in the open field."

[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.

[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.

[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]

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]

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."

[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]

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.

[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]

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