IUP Women's Basketball | 2019-20

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Tom has offered two WPIAL players - one a rising senior and one a rising junior.

Both play at Southmoreland.

[Bart]

This is becoming a tradition. Tom's reputation is so strong in the coaching community that his assistants are able to leave here and move up quickly.

Both are good hires. Lexi gives them that assistant who can practice against the team -- which is a huge perk.

Boehner can probably also still play against the team. After her freshman of the year award, she was a loss for Bloom.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

New assistant coaches:

https://www.indianagazette.com/sport...f8012f087.html

This is becoming a tradition. Tom's reputation is so strong in the coaching community that his assistants are able to leave here and move up quickly.

Both are good hires. Lexi gives them that assistant who can practice against the team -- which is a huge perk.

[Bart]

New assistant coaches:

https://www.indianagazette.com/sport...f8012f087.html

[IUP CRIMSON HAWKS]

So who pays the athlete?

Who pays them now? LOL

[IUP24]

A pretty fair question. I guess there would be a pay scale. So much for frosh with an increment each year you are on campus. Additional money for players of note-----all-conference, all-american, etc. Sign on bonuses for recruits.

At least it would be more transparent and honest than what it is currently.

I remember reading Brian Bosworth's book years ago and he said that when he was a "student-athlete" at Oklahoma in the 1980s he had a deluxe apartment, a corvette and a jeep in his driveway, nice clothes to wear, and money in his pocket. He held no "paying job" and none of this cost him a dime. Where do you think the money came from to provide such a lifestyle? This sort of thing goes on all the time and everywhere. I don't blame the athletes one bit. I just want things to see the light of day and have them out in the open. Make it fair to all programs across the board. Have sign on bonuses and a pay scale of some sort.

So who pays the athlete?

[IUP CRIMSON HAWKS]

So where do you draw the line on who gets paid? 1st team all Americans? 1st team all conference? What’s the going rate for the freshmen who haven’t played a game yet? Do you only pay the 5 star recruits? What about the kid who’s a 5 star according to one service but a 4 star according to another? And exactly how much are you paying these guys to persuade them to stay in school longer? $1000 a week probably won’t cut it.

I think you’d create far more problems than you’d solve.

A pretty fair question. I guess there would be a pay scale. So much for frosh with an increment each year you are on campus. Additional money for players of note-----all-conference, all-american, etc. Sign on bonuses for recruits.

At least it would be more transparent and honest than what it is currently.

I remember reading Brian Bosworth's book years ago and he said that when he was a "student-athlete" at Oklahoma in the 1980s he had a deluxe apartment, a corvette and a jeep in his driveway, nice clothes to wear, and money in his pocket. He held no "paying job" and none of this cost him a dime. Where do you think the money came from to provide such a lifestyle? This sort of thing goes on all the time and everywhere. I don't blame the athletes one bit. I just want things to see the light of day and have them out in the open. Make it fair to all programs across the board. Have sign on bonuses and a pay scale of some sort.

[IUP CRIMSON HAWKS]

Interesting discussion of a complicated issue. I think the current structure of D1 sports is inherently flawed. I suggest that we start with what is best for the athlete as the foundational premise and go forward from there. Here are some brainstorm ideas.
1. A great athlete should not be locked out of the possibility of a huge professional income just because they are not academically qualified for college. Currently colleges are committing academic fraud and exploiting athletes.
2. Every athlete should be given training for a middle class career, in the likely event they are not good enough to be a professional. This should be in technical trades (plumbing, electrician, diesel mechanic, etc. ) or a real academic major (not a worthless major just to maintain eligibility). Should they turn pro early, they have the right to return to technical school or college tuition free for up to 10 years after they retire to avoid coaches channeling players out of college majors for selfish reasons.
3. Zero tuition dollars from regular students should be used to fund athletics. Donors, ticket sales, and the pro leagues would be required cover the shortfall
4. Colleges must set union pay scales for coaches to avoid the bidding war, maybe like the GS schedule in the government. It is ridiculous the salaries being paid to coaches. It is just a game, for pete's sake. This would reduce the influence of the big money donors.
5. Most radically, reduce The number of D1 football and basketball teams and align them with the pro teams, rather than a school. This is startng to happen with the G league in basketball. They will siphon off the best one and done players. This will reduce the donors who are controlling college athletics now for bragging rights for their alma mater and eliminate coaching bidding war at the universities and shift it to the business of the pro league. But the pro minor leagues still have to honor item 2 above and not exploit the athletes.

It is a complex issue and the above items are just a starting point for widening the view of possible solutions. Not all are feasible. But the hypocrisy and exploitation has to stop.

Interesting things. I really like some of your ideas.

[Chuck Norris]

NO! That is not what I am talking about. Nobody is paying any money at all under the table for the vast majority of these sports. I want to level the playing field when it comes to major football and basketball recruiting by having a set amount these top flight guys can make. It would legitimize things much more than having all of these backroom deals and program bag men.

The NCAA should just be honest with itself and admit that they have a problem here. Why take Reggie Bush's Heisman when probably just about every single guy who won it took money or other benefits just the same as he did?

I just don't think that you are looking at the issue pragmatically enough here.

So where do you draw the line on who gets paid? 1st team all Americans? 1st team all conference? What’s the going rate for the freshmen who haven’t played a game yet? Do you only pay the 5 star recruits? What about the kid who’s a 5 star according to one service but a 4 star according to another? And exactly how much are you paying these guys to persuade them to stay in school longer? $1000 a week probably won’t cut it.

I think you’d create far more problems than you’d solve.

[Columbuseer]

Interesting discussion of a complicated issue. I think the current structure of D1 sports is inherently flawed. I suggest that we start with what is best for the athlete as the foundational premise and go forward from there. Here are some brainstorm ideas.
1. A great athlete should not be locked out of the possibility of a huge professional income just because they are not academically qualified for college. Currently colleges are committing academic fraud and exploiting athletes.
2. Every athlete should be given training for a middle class career, in the likely event they are not good enough to be a professional. This should be in technical trades (plumbing, electrician, diesel mechanic, etc. ) or a real academic major (not a worthless major just to maintain eligibility). Should they turn pro early, they have the right to return to technical school or college tuition free for up to 10 years after they retire to avoid coaches channeling players out of college majors for selfish reasons.
3. Zero tuition dollars from regular students should be used to fund athletics. Donors, ticket sales, and the pro leagues would be required cover the shortfall
4. Colleges must set union pay scales for coaches to avoid the bidding war, maybe like the GS schedule in the government. It is ridiculous the salaries being paid to coaches. It is just a game, for pete's sake. This would reduce the influence of the big money donors.
5. Most radically, reduce The number of D1 football and basketball teams and align them with the pro teams, rather than a school. This is startng to happen with the G league in basketball. They will siphon off the best one and done players. This will reduce the donors who are controlling college athletics now for bragging rights for their alma mater and eliminate coaching bidding war at the universities and shift it to the business of the pro league. But the pro minor leagues still have to honor item 2 above and not exploit the athletes.

It is a complex issue and the above items are just a starting point for widening the view of possible solutions. Not all are feasible. But the hypocrisy and exploitation has to stop.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

NO! That is not what I am talking about. Nobody is paying any money at all under the table for the vast majority of these sports. I want to level the playing field when it comes to major football and basketball recruiting by having a set amount these top flight guys can make. It would legitimize things much more than having all of these backroom deals and program bag men.

The NCAA should just be honest with itself and admit that they have a problem here. Why take Reggie Bush's Heisman when probably just about every single guy who won it took money or other benefits just the same as he did?

I just don't think that you are looking at the issue pragmatically enough here.

I'll give Reggie Bush credit. He just rolled with the punches. He served his phony ban from the USC campus and gave back the Heisman. That whole Pete Carroll era at USC was so dirty.

He's a good coach but not a good enough coach to turn a 5-5 yearly program (at the time) into world-beaters within 2 years. Reggie was clearly not the only one there to receive 'benefits'.

[IUP CRIMSON HAWKS]

It wouldn't.

If you can find a way to pay an equal sum to every athlete, in every sport, at every level, I'm all for it. But that presence doesn't necessarily exist. And as I said, I'm a big free market guy. Big capitalist. Big "get what you're worth" guy. I just don't know the ultimate solution.

The under the table deals have happened since college athletics started. Is it worse now? Maybe. But it could also just be relative to the era and society we live in also.

NO! That is not what I am talking about. Nobody is paying any money at all under the table for the vast majority of these sports. I want to level the playing field when it comes to major football and basketball recruiting by having a set amount these top flight guys can make. It would legitimize things much more than having all of these backroom deals and program bag men.

The NCAA should just be honest with itself and admit that they have a problem here. Why take Reggie Bush's Heisman when probably just about every single guy who won it took money or other benefits just the same as he did?

I just don't think that you are looking at the issue pragmatically enough here.

[IUP CRIMSON HAWKS]

Boosters -- mega boosters -- don't play by rules. They are alpha business people who make the rules ... not abide by them. An AD making $125k a year doesn't tell them what to do.

That guy in Blue Chips, Happy, ... that's a mythical, real guy. They exist. Look at your H2P ... the power Golden Panthers run that whole athletic department. Not officially, of course, but they call all the shots.

Great post! Yup, the film Blue Chips absolutely nailed it. If anyone thinks that you have a great college athletic program just by playing by the rules then you have another thing coming. Same as running for high political office. What did they say that the last successful US Senate campaign cost in PA? I wish I could remember the figure but it was a crazy number like $100-200 million. Which is really nuts for a job that only pays a mere tiny fraction of that money.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

It wouldn't.

If you can find a way to pay an equal sum to every athlete, in every sport, at every level, I'm all for it. But that presence doesn't necessarily exist. And as I said, I'm a big free market guy. Big capitalist. Big "get what you're worth" guy. I just don't know the ultimate solution.

The under the table deals have happened since college athletics started. Is it worse now? Maybe. But it could also just be relative to the era and society we live in also.

Boosters -- mega boosters -- don't play by rules. They are alpha business people who make the rules ... not abide by them. An AD making $125k a year doesn't tell them what to do.

That guy in Blue Chips, Happy, ... that's a mythical, real guy. They exist. Look at your H2P ... the power Golden Panthers run that whole athletic department. Not officially, of course, but they call all the shots.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

It would require sweeping changes to college athletics that is for sure. I think most would agree that the NCAA is a broken down system anyways. That would be a real good place to start. I'm just saying that by lining the pocket books of the true elite stars you could keep them around longer and increase the interest and profits in the sport.

Well, not really. If Zion must play one year at Duke ... so be it. But, on Day 1 (after that year) he's going to hit the PowerBall.