Ralph Nader: Replace Scholarships

by **RednBlue11** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:48 pm

Whoa!

WASHINGTON -- Consumer advocate Ralph Nader is calling for the elimination of college athletic scholarships, saying the move is necessary to "de-professionalize" college athletes.

Nader's League of Fans, a group aimed at reforming sports, proposes that the scholarships be replaced with need-based financial aid. He says that would help restore academic integrity to college sports.

The Associated Press obtained a copy of the proposal Thursday, ahead of its official release.

Nader, a former presidential candidate, argues that his plan would also help reduce the "win-at-all-costs" mentality in high schools, by reducing the incentive of college scholarships.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6254572

3

2

1

let the poop flinging begin!

by **2ndandlong** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 5:55 pm

there are so many things wrong with that it is making my blood boil. I'm going to go find a thread between stallion, edgeofmyseat, hoopfan, and mitch mcconnell to calm down.

by **couch 'em** » Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:27 pm

This is so good for us. If Nader can convince all the cash-strapped states to go along with his plan, all of us private schools can together keep offering scholarships. We'll have ALL the greatest athletes and a huge fan base.

by **DiamondM75** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 8:45 am

couch 'em wrote:This is so good for us. If Nader can convince all the cash-strapped states to go along with his plan, all of us private schools can together keep offering scholarships. We'll have ALL the greatest athletes and a huge fan base.

Couch 'em might be right, but it depends on the definition of "need based". If an athlete can afford an $8,000 state school but can not afford a $30,000 private schoo. Does the athlete have a "financial need" at the private school, and therefore the private school is allowed to offer a scholy while the state school can not.

by **mrydel** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:37 am

I wanted a Corvair.

by **Mitch McConnell** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:09 am

Nader's plan to implement socialism into college athletics. He will never win this.

by **RednBlue11** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:20 am

not socialism

/facepalm

i really like to believe that most of the people on this board are educated enough to know when, and when not, to claim a policy suggestion is socialism

by **ender3** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:24 am

It's the new Godwin's law.

As any discussion on the internet progresses, the probability that one of the participants will invoke "socialism" approaches one.

At which point, the discussion is over, there is no further chance for rational discourse.

by **Mitch McConnell** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:25 am

We can argue what it is and is not.

Do you think he's going to win this with all of the good ole boys and the billions of dollars in college athletics now?

He's got a major uphill fight on his hands.

I understand that athletic programs like SMU potentially would be in a better position. Maybe I point blanked it too much.

But the Texas, USC, Florida, Ohio State's in the landscape along with CBS, ESPN and FOX do not want to see the size of their athletic department budgets and size of the TV deals greatly impacted.

by **RednBlue11** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:37 am

Mitch McConnell wrote:We can argue what it is and is not.

Do you think he's going to win this with all of the good ole boys and the billions of dollars in college athletics now?

He's got a major uphill fight on his hands.

I understand that athletic programs like SMU potentially would be in a better position. Maybe I point blanked it too much.

But the Texas, USC, Florida, Ohio State's in the landscape along with CBS, ESPN and FOX do not want to see the size of their athletic department budgets and size of the TV deals greatly impacted.

no there is nothing to argue about, it has a very clear definition and this does not meet it.

by **Mitch McConnell** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:40 am

OK, fine it doesn't. I'm not going to get into this anymore.

But this will not go anywhere.

by **RednBlue11** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:49 am

by **NickSMU17** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:59 am

Karl Marx 10 steps to Socialism or if you prefer the steps to Communism

1)One of the first steps to Socialism is the abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2) The second of the steps to Socialism is the heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3) Third in the series of steps to Socialism is abolition of all right of inheritance.

4) Fourth in the series of steps to Socialism is the confiscation of the property of emigrants and rebels.

5) Fifth in the series of steps to Socialism is the centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6) Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.

7) Seventh in the series of steps to Socialism is the extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8 ) Eighth in the steps to Socialism is equal liability of all to labor; establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equitable distribution of population over the country.

10) The last in the series of steps to Socialism is free education for all children in public schoolsâ€¦

by **Mitch McConnell** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 11:09 am

RednBlue11 wrote:

LOL

by **Bergermeister** » Fri Mar 25, 2011 2:27 pm

2ndandlong wrote:there are so many things wrong with that it is making my blood boil.

Consider the source.