PonyFans.com

His comparison between NCAA and Soviet Union is idiotic, but he calls for changes in player benefits, reforming transfer rules and ridding college basketball of the one-and-done players.

Interesting.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... n-new-book

I like some of his ideas, particularly increasing stipends, paying insurance premiums, and providing roundtrip airfare once a year for guys to go home.

I dont know if I can get on board with the 50K loan idea, I'd be afraid guys would abuse that and put themselves in deep financial trouble in the long run. But then again if regular students can take out 200k in student loans, maybe they should be allowed to do this.

Lifting the transfer year for coaches that leave is a double-edged sword; could players just follow their coaches and allow a coach to completely ruin a program when he leaves by cherrypicking the best players to bring with him? That would certainly drive coaches' salaries up

PonyPride wrote:His comparison between NCAA and Soviet Union is idiotic, but he calls for changes in player benefits, reforming transfer rules and ridding college basketball of the one-and-done players.

Interesting.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... n-new-book

He saying the NCAA is crumbling bit by bit but can still hurt you similar to the Soviet Union. And he has a point. He may mean by doing away with the one and done to allow players to go pro straight out of high school like hockey.

How much do you pay the girl's equestrian team?
What about the band members? just saying.

bubba pony wrote:How much do you pay the girl's equestrian team?
What about the band members? just saying.

They are non revenue activities. They don't get a stipend now. But the Olympic sports can do things that the revenues sports can't do like sell jerseys etc. Just saying.

bubba pony wrote:How much do you pay the girl's equestrian team?
What about the band members? just saying.

I'd like to think you could break up the stipends and benefits by sport, so revenue sports athletes would get more than the womens' equestrian team member who is already stealing by getting a free college education.

Now I'll wait for the usual suspects from the UMass gay player thread to come call me a bigoted sexist.

East Coast Mustang wrote:

bubba pony wrote:How much do you pay the girl's equestrian team?
What about the band members? just saying.

I'd like to think you could break up the stipends and benefits by sport, so revenue sports athletes would get more than the womens' equestrian team member who is already stealing by getting a free college education.

Now I'll wait for the usual suspects from the UMass gay player thread to come call me a bigoted sexist.

Olympic sports can do more than revenue sports. In fact a chancellor at one college was saying that the revenue sports need to have the same opportunities as the Olympic sports and that would solve a lot of problems.

No way they could pay revenue sports and not pay non-revenue sports. The lawyers would line up by the thousand to get involved in that case.

"If you're going to pay the quarterback and the small forward, you have to pay the midfielder and the backstroker, etc. You can't say one sport works harder than the others, or penalize these other athletes for being female, being too short to be a basketball star, etc."

Silk wrote:No way they could pay revenue sports and not pay non-revenue sports. The lawyers would line up by the thousand to get involved in that case.

"If you're going to pay the quarterback and the small forward, you have to pay the midfielder and the backstroker, etc. You can't say one sport works harder than the others, or penalize these other athletes for being female, being too short to be a basketball star, etc."

They won't. They don't now so no need to worry about that. Cal is only taking about increasing benefits they already have which people seem to be twisting into paying athletes of all sports.

Where was all this crap when WE were gettin' busted?

bubba pony wrote:How much do you pay the girl's equestrian team?
What about the band members? just saying.

Fans?

Calipari's a [deleted] but he has a point. The NCAA is about to have a revolt on it's hands.

The NCAA is made up of more than 1200 schools, from the Ohio States to 100's of schools I'm sure nobody has ever heard of - I can't even think of a Div III team that hasn't played for a football championship. And the NCAA is trying to say that it's role for all of these are the same: provide a platform for fair play and competition while trying to help a kid get an education - they are not now and never will be money-makers. Over 1000 of those schools aren't ever going to be on TV and aren't concerned about conference realignment and are not willing to give a football player even $100 a week when about 20 people show up to their homecoming game. But when you say the word 'NCAA' people automatically think of OSU or Florida.

Meanwhile 60 or 70 schools are looking at the massive growth of college athletics as a form of entertainment, as a marketing department, and as their only PR to their alumni and are telling the NCAA 'Your model no longer works for us.' They are seeing an opportunity to earn upwards of 8 figures a year for the school itself - maybe more - and to position the school as a champion of something, ANYTHING when they aren't going to compete with Ivy League schools any time soon. They aren't going to wait are around for the University of Wisconsin Eau Claire's of the world who have no possibility of paying their players.

Point is, the NCAA as a group is NEVER going to be able to go as far as the Alabama's and Texas's want them to go.

As far as women's sports go, there are those who think that women's sports will start to move to a point where they can be a moneymaker, with not only the growth of not only women's basketball but other sports, and the advent of the conference networks they actually starting to see some money trickle in. (Helllloooo women in volleyball shorts....).

I tend to think, however, it could be the gender aspect of sports that decide whether the NCAA is truly a business or more along the lines of what colleges think collegiant sports are. Tennis is about the only sport where women make the same as men - because, I think, it's the only sport where the women's game is more interesting than the men's - and it's going to be interesting to see how they distribute the money amongst players. We'll see.