RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

OT: Football star suspended for autographs
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/14 2:43 pm    ::: OT: Football star suspended for autographs Reply Reply with quote

So coaches can't do endorsements, right? They can't put their name and likeness up on billboards for car companies, or use their name on coaching videos, or get paid for appearances at clinics?

After all, people pay to watch the coaches, don't they?



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/10/14 5:18 pm    ::: Re: OT: Football star suspended for autographs Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
So coaches can't do endorsements, right? They can't put their name and likeness up on billboards for car companies, or use their name on coaching videos, or get paid for appearances at clinics?

After all, people pay to watch the coaches, don't they?


Total non sequitor. Coaches aren't amateurs. HS coaches get paid too. So do elementary school coaches. You want to start paying 7th graders who play sports now too? If not, what arbitrary distinction are you attempting to draw?

Why do you want so badly to eliminate amateur sports?

You want to bitch about someone, bitch about the pro leagues that impose age and "years out of HS" requirements. Let players who want to turn pro turn pro. If they can't find a job, that's their problem. But there is no need or justification for destroying amateur sports.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/14 8:33 am    ::: Re: OT: Football star suspended for autographs Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
ClayK wrote:
So coaches can't do endorsements, right? They can't put their name and likeness up on billboards for car companies, or use their name on coaching videos, or get paid for appearances at clinics?

After all, people pay to watch the coaches, don't they?


Total non sequitor. Coaches aren't amateurs. HS coaches get paid too. So do elementary school coaches. You want to start paying 7th graders who play sports now too? If not, what arbitrary distinction are you attempting to draw?

Why do you want so badly to eliminate amateur sports?

You want to bitch about someone, bitch about the pro leagues that impose age and "years out of HS" requirements. Let players who want to turn pro turn pro. If they can't find a job, that's their problem. But there is no need or justification for destroying amateur sports.


Very well said Art. Couldn't agree more.


willtalk



Joined: 13 Apr 2012
Posts: 1088
Location: NorCal


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/11/14 1:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

But should they have suspended him? As a student the proper punishment should have been to make him write his name on a black board 1000 times.


Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 8:33 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I was wondering, just wondering mind you, my son receives a Division I scholarship, gets tuition, room and board. He works in the summer to pay for his books and spending money for each semester. However his time working is truncated due to his practice obligation so he can't make as much as he would like. It is difficult for work study at college as just with his work load, practice and events precludes him from doing so.

They do give him a per diem for events and I was just wondering, why not increase and expand the per diem to cover additionally daily expensives. I saw a show where one of the players was being interviewed by the program's reporter. They were looking at his Jersey which was for sale yet he received nothing for it. Then at the end the show the reporters states the kid wanted to buy a hamburger but had no money. He offered him the money but the kid said no it was a violation.

Every semester I give him several quarter coin sleeves to pay for use of the laundry machines on campus. Why not increase to cover things like that. All in all he is not going to leave college debt free ( who does) but his scholarship helps but then again he gives back with his athletic talent and I guess in a very legitimate way say his participation in sports is his work study job.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.


Last edited by Oldfandepot2 on 10/12/14 8:56 am; edited 2 times in total
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 8:41 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

That's what the "full cost of attendance" stipend is about. It will likely happen within the next year at the power five schools.


Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 9:19 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
That's what the "full cost of attendance" stipend is about. It will likely happen within the next year at the power five schools.

Yes, I was happy to see that. My son's typical day would be to rise at 5am go to the weight room or run with the team, then a mini work out, breakfast with the team, classes, then travel to an event for away events or with no events, practice, then dinner with the team, then mandatory study hall. Back to the dorm by around nine and as their coach would tell them the rest of the day is theirs Wink

With that in mind I believe they should severly limit the involvement of the athletes participation in the program such as no spring or early pre semester practices, severly restricting the in semester practices and workouts unless they are receiving the full enchalda you mentioned.
The other thing you mentioned about this idiotic mandatory stay in school rather than being allowed to go to the pros I totally agree with you. It clearly benefits the pros and the school and not the athlete.

By the way Art, having been a ND football fan since the womb, what has happened to the defense since the day of my favorite ND team of Alan Page et al. Love the win but Geez can they stop anybody!



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
Youth Coach



Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Posts: 4752



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 9:40 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I have little sympathy for Gurley.

It is ridiculous that players can't profit from their own image or success.

However, those are the current rules governing the NCAA. Players know it. If they break said rules, they have to face the music.

Keep working to change the rules, but don't break the rules in the meantime.
Oldfandepot2



Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 996
Location: Northeast


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 9:46 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Youth Coach wrote:
I have little sympathy for Gurley.

It is ridiculous that players can't profit from their own image or success.

However, those are the current rules governing the NCAA. Players know it. If they break said rules, they have to face the music.

Keep working to change the rules, but don't break the rules in the meantime.


If the rules like law are unjust they deserve to be broken if not for the fact to bring attention to its unfairness. Antigone.



_________________
Cave Canem!
We must listen to each other no matter how much it hurts. Bishop Desmond Tutu.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 9:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Youth Coach wrote:
Keep working to change the rules, but don't break the rules in the meantime.


One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 11:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Unjust? Seriously? You think there is a moral issue here?

So anyone who wants these rules elimiminated must look forward to "Hey, 5* running back. Come to Auburn and I'll pay you $50,000 for your autograph".

I really can't comprehend why so many are so eager to abolish amateur sports. Let those who want to get paid turn pro. Leave amateur college sports alone.

BTW, while civil disobedience has zilch to do with amateurism rules, both Ghandi and MLK among others would teach that those who choose to break unjust laws in protest must willingly accept the consequences.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 12:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oldfandepot2 wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
That's what the "full cost of attendance" stipend is about. It will likely happen within the next year at the power five schools.

Yes, I was happy to see that. My son's typical day would be to rise at 5am go to the weight room or run with the team, then a mini work out, breakfast with the team, classes, then travel to an event for away events or with no events, practice, then dinner with the team, then mandatory study hall. Back to the dorm by around nine and as their coach would tell them the rest of the day is theirs Wink

With that in mind I believe they should severly limit the involvement of the athletes participation in the program such as no spring or early pre semester practices, severly restricting the in semester practices and workouts unless they are receiving the full enchalda you mentioned.
The other thing you mentioned about this idiotic mandatory stay in school rather than being allowed to go to the pros I totally agree with you. It clearly benefits the pros and the school and not the athlete.

By the way Art, having been a ND football fan since the womb, what has happened to the defense since the day of my favorite ND team of Alan Page et al. Love the win but Geez can they stop anybody!


Notwithstanding yesterday's sloppy game, ND's defense has been great. Last week held a much better Stanford team to 205 total yards, 47 rushing yards, 1.5 yards per carry. Also shut out Michigan - first time they'd been shut out in like fifty years. The defense is fine.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 6:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Quote:
I really can't comprehend why so many are so eager to abolish amateur sports. Let those who want to get paid turn pro. Leave amateur college sports alone.


I think the issue for me is the word "amateur". When coaches make millions, when ADs are paid in the high six figures, when TV contracts total in the billions for all sports, I don't think the word "amateur" applies.

If the coaches coach for room, board and the ability to take classes for free, then the players should too. (In California public high schools, a basketball coach will get around $2,000 a season, though in some districts the coach has to raise that money so he can pay himself -- now that's amateur.)

If the NCAA and the schools are selling the player's jersey, why shouldn't the player get a cut? Now, if this was an amateur operation, the jersey would be given away or sold at cost -- and of course, that isn't happening.

College sports at the Division I level are not amateur in any sense, at least not in football and basketball, and I don't see why the players should have to live by one code while those who benefit from their talents live by another.[/quote]



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15691
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 10:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NotExactlyClearOnWho wrote:
College sports at the Division I level are not amateur in any sense, at least not in football and basketball, and I don't see why the players should have to live by one code while those who benefit from their talents live by another.


I agree wholeheartedly with this; it's like a system of indentured servitude. Kids get an "Education" (that's nice....) but administrators and coaches make disproportionately HUGE sums of money each year, off the very hard efforts of athletes who are highly distracted away from their Real Educational Endeavors AND putting their bodies on the line at every turn. There is an inherent unfairness to all this, ESPECIALLY because of the exorbitant sums of money generated BY their efforts FOR their institutions and overseers.

If a kid becomes a NFL or NBA legend, then he, too will makes lots of money. But MOST will not come remotely close to that.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"


Last edited by Howee on 10/12/14 10:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/12/14 10:06 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Quote:
I really can't comprehend why so many are so eager to abolish amateur sports. Let those who want to get paid turn pro. Leave amateur college sports alone.


I think the issue for me is the word "amateur". When coaches make millions, when ADs are paid in the high six figures, when TV contracts total in the billions for all sports, I don't think the word "amateur" applies.

If the coaches coach for room, board and the ability to take classes for free, then the players should too. (In California public high schools, a basketball coach will get around $2,000 a season, though in some districts the coach has to raise that money so he can pay himself -- now that's amateur.)

If the NCAA and the schools are selling the player's jersey, why shouldn't the player get a cut? Now, if this was an amateur operation, the jersey would be given away or sold at cost -- and of course, that isn't happening.

College sports at the Division I level are not amateur in any sense, at least not in football and basketball, and I don't see why the players should have to live by one code while those who benefit from their talents live by another.
[/quote]

Every reason you give applies equally to junior high sports. The coaches get paid, the schools sell souvenirs and concessions and t shirts. You're just offended that the amount of money has gotten much larger. But that doesn't alter at all the fundamental nature of the game.

They're amateur. The players don't get paid for playing. That's it.

You know the USGA gets paid a bunch of money for the television rights to the US Amateur championship. That doesn't change that it's an amateur championship. The winner gets a trophy, not a million dollar check as in PGA tournaments. It doesn't matter how much the sponsoring organization or the caddies or the coaches get paid. The players don't get money, so it's amateur. It's very simple.

You should just stick to the pro leagues if you hate amateur sports so much.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11105



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 9:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't think I quite qualify as hating amateur sports ...

As for junior high football, or high school football, the reality for the money raised that you mention (selling concessions, etc.) is that, in most of the country, it goes right back into the programs.

So in a very affluent area of Northern California, this is how much money a high school sports program receives from the district:

Zero.

The money raised from concessions, from ticket sales, from sponsorships, etc., goes to pay for coaches, uniforms, officials, etc.

Of course in many areas of the country the support is much more substantial, and in Texas, they build huge stadiums. But in general, nobody makes any money off high school sports. It is an amateur operation.

Division I college sports, like the Olympics (ancient and modern), is a huge business, regardless of how it's structured. Remember, the NFL is a non-profit organization too, and to call that "amateur" is like calling the 1960 Olympic Games amateur.

It's a big business, yet the most valuable employees don't get paid a fair wage. How is that fair?



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 9:57 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

And in college sports, the money goes right back into the programs and the schools. The money raised from concessions, from ticket sales, from sponsorships, etc., and from TV, goes to pay for coaches, uniforms, officials, travel, etc., not only for football but for rowing, diving, volleyball, track, lacrosse, field hockey, gymnastics, softball, soccer, etc. Same exact thing. Only the amounts involved are increased.

And while in some places all the money stays in the athletic department, in others like Notre Dame, substantial amounts go into the student aid endowment for scholarships for normal non-athlete students based on financial need.

Nobody makes a profit, there are no shareholders or dividends.

And the NFL thing is completely inapposite and widely misunderstood. The only thing that's "non profit" under the tax code is the league office because it makes no profit and all amounts are distributed to the teams which most certainly are profit making and are taxed accordingly. (which is why the NFL doesn't really care if it loses that tax break, it won't pay any taxes at the league office level anyhow.)

These are amateur sports. Just like high schools sell tickets for football and basketball games, colleges sell tickets and TV rights for football and basketball games. The amounts are vastly larger because the audience is vastly larger. But that doesn't change the nature of it. But the players are amateurs and don't get paid. It's really not hard to understand.

Just admit it. You're offended by how much coaches get paid. That's all your crusade is about.

Oh, and BTW, contrary to your notion that everyone's getting rich, nearly every school is losing their ass on their athletic programs which are heavily subsidized by the schools from tuition, fees, the state, donations, endowments and other sources of funds.

As I said, if players don't want to be amateurs, then they're free to become professionals. If the professional leagues won't take them, the colleges have no say or control in that. Complain to the pro leagues.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15691
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 10:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
"Nobody makes a profit, there are no shareholders or dividends."....and...."Just admit it. You're offended by how much coaches get paid."


The above statements appear to be contradictory. "Nobody" makes a profit? Yet, coaches get paid too much?

Seriously. Big TV Market College athletics (e.g., football, basketball) are NOT hugely successful productions because the Powers That Be beneficently want The Masses to have their entertainment. They are marketed for their huge commercial value. "Somebody" is making a profit.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 11:15 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
"Nobody makes a profit, there are no shareholders or dividends."....and...."Just admit it. You're offended by how much coaches get paid."


The above statements appear to be contradictory. "Nobody" makes a profit? Yet, coaches get paid too much?

Seriously. Big TV Market College athletics (e.g., football, basketball) are NOT hugely successful productions because the Powers That Be beneficently want The Masses to have their entertainment. They are marketed for their huge commercial value. "Somebody" is making a profit.


We're talking taxes. Salaries paid to employees are not, by definition, a distribution of profits. They are an expense, a deduction from revenue.

Sure, TV networks make a profits. Private concession operators make a profit. But schools aren't profit making organizations. The revenue they generate gets poured back into the schools either to fund the athletic department or to fund the university as a whole. There are no owners or shareholders to whom profits are distributed. And in most places athletic departments are a net expense - costs vastly exceed revenue and the shortfall must come from other university funding sources.


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 5152
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 11:19 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This isn't about "amateur" sports. This is about fairness. When coaches are making millions, when TV rights are in the billions and when the NFL and NBA are getting free minor leagues to groom their talent, the word "amateur" is wholly inappropriate. And the real question is "fairness to whom?"

Many people may not like the consequences of adjusting the system. Other sports will have to fight even harder for the pennies they get from the administration. This is especially true for men's sports like rowing or rugby. Women's sports could also get hit as the same people trying to maintain their fiefdoms look for ways to water down the accounting for Title IX.

Indeed the fight now is whether the power conferences can adjust the system in such a way they get almost all the money while paying their football and men's basketball players as little as possible. Can they figure out a way to legislate paying just that group more while not paying other athletes the same amount. And as this fight goes on the word "amateur" will get thrown around but the real issue is fairness.

Ed O'Bannon was a very good basketball player who will go down in history not for his play on the court but his actions in the courtroom. Todd Gurley will merely be a footnote because he will make his millions from the NFL unless he tries to rock the boat right now.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 12:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
This isn't about "amateur" sports. This is about fairness. When coaches are making millions, when TV rights are in the billions and when the NFL and NBA are getting free minor leagues to groom their talent, the word "amateur" is wholly inappropriate. And the real question is "fairness to whom?"

Many people may not like the consequences of adjusting the system. Other sports will have to fight even harder for the pennies they get from the administration. This is especially true for men's sports like rowing or rugby. Women's sports could also get hit as the same people trying to maintain their fiefdoms look for ways to water down the accounting for Title IX.

Indeed the fight now is whether the power conferences can adjust the system in such a way they get almost all the money while paying their football and men's basketball players as little as possible. Can they figure out a way to legislate paying just that group more while not paying other athletes the same amount. And as this fight goes on the word "amateur" will get thrown around but the real issue is fairness.

Ed O'Bannon was a very good basketball player who will go down in hi

story not for his play on the court but his actions in the courtroom. Todd Gurley will merely be a footnote because he will make his millions from the NFL unless he tries to rock the boat right now.


Then complain to the NFL. It's not the colleges' fault or choice that the NFL uses them as a farm league instead of creating their own.

The word "amateur" is most definitely appropriate. That's what it is.

Don't like that players who want to play for money in football can't? Complain to the NFL, or get Congress to outlaw the practice of allowing the NFL and NFLPA to collude to deny players that opportunity. There is no need or justification for destroying amateur college athletics just because you don't like the way the NFL operates. The colleges (other than KY and a handful of others) certainly don't like the NBA's "one year wonder" rule. It wasn't their doing and they would much prefer it was eliminated.

Baseball, hockey, tennis, golf, and other sports work just fine by allowing players who want to play for pay to do so by turning pro whenever they want, and those who choose to remain amateurs to play in college. It's interesting that in both baseball and hockey, the number of players who CHOOSE VOLUNTARILY to go to college and play as amateurs even when they have the opportunity to sign pro contracts has been increasing
dramatically in recent years.

Women BB players could go to Europe or China anytime they want. That's where the money is anyhow - not in the WNBA. So how many choose to do that rather than playing as amateurs in college?

And no, the power 5 are NOT trying to figure out how to prevent paying other athletes. They accepted long ago that any benefits they give football players will have to got to all players in all sports, men and women. That's what makes it all so very expensive. And that's why some non-revenue sports will likely get eliminated in the process.

BTW, the O'Bannon decision was no surprise. The judge had signaled her personal views for a long time. But personally I expect it to be overturned. Her application of the antitrust laws is seriously flawed, internally contradictory, and contrary to prior Supreme Court statements on the subject.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 4040



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 2:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Just admit it. You're offended by how much coaches get paid. That's all your crusade is about.


That statement is not justified. Clay has been consistent in his support for college player's rights, specifically on the issue of transfers. He has often complained that coaches do not have to wait a year to participate when they decide to leave a program, so why deny players the same opportunities.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 3:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
Just admit it. You're offended by how much coaches get paid. That's all your crusade is about.


That statement is not justified. Clay has been consistent in his support for college player's rights, specifically on the issue of transfers. He has often complained that coaches do not have to wait a year to participate when they decide to leave a program, so why deny players the same opportunities.


Actually it is entirely justified. Every time it is couched, as it is this time, in terms of

ClayK wrote:
When coaches make millions, when ADs are paid in the high six figures, when TV contracts total in the billions for all sports, I don't think the word "amateur" applies.


So it's all about the amount of money. But that is completely irrelevant to the issue. Whether the school is charging $2/ticket, or is receiving $2M in TV rights for a game, whether a coach is getting paid $3M/yr or $100,000/yr, the issue is exactly the same. The players are amateurs. The amount of money surrounding it doesn't change that status at all.

Directing one's ire at the colleges because the NFL won't let the players turn pro is completely misplaced.

It is completely evident every time this play-for-pay issue comes up that Clay's complaint is that coaches and schools are getting paid a lot and the players aren't. We're not talking transfers here at all. I stand completely by the statement about which you are complaining.

Maybe someone can identify for me the precise threshold at which, once a coach is getting paid more than X dollars, the players on the team are no longer amateurs. Wake me when you can provide that number and the rationale for it.

Seriously, who is an amateur and who supposedly is not an amateur? Are players at Wake Forest Amateurs? Rice? Yale? What about at Bucknell? Pacific Union? Villanova?

Are players in Cal HSs where coaches get a $2000 stipend amateurs but players in Texas HSs where coaches get paid $140,000 pros?

What is the derivation and basis for any logical, legal or any other definition of an amateur athlete that depends on how much the player's coach is getting paid or how much the school is collecting in ticket or TV money?

This platitude that "there's a lot a money involved so the players aren't amateurs" gets thrown around here all the time without any basis, justification, logic or explanation. It's time for the proponents of that view to provide a rational foundation for it.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66773
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 10:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
They're amateur. The players don't get paid for playing. That's it.


So Gurley should not have been suspended. Selling his autograph is not the same as being paid to play. He's just as much an amateur as he was before.

I do not understand why amateurism is so highly valued by fans.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550



Back to top
PostPosted: 10/13/14 10:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:
They're amateur. The players don't get paid for playing. That's it.


So Gurley should not have been suspended. Selling his autograph is not the same as being paid to play. He's just as much an amateur as he was before.

I do not understand why amateurism is so highly valued by fans.


He's being paid by reason of his athletic endeavors. That's a violation of amateurism rules in every sport. It is being paid to play. Always has been. Not even a close call.

If amateurism doesn't matter to you, then stick to the pros. Don't ruin it for everyone else to whom it does matter.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin