RebKell's Junkie Boards

[hyperetic]

[TechDawgMc]

He must not have watched Wisconsin play

[ClayK]

[summertime blues]

[ArtBest23]

Typical.

Who is forcing these kids to play for nothing?

Is it the NCAA? Or is it the NBA that denies them the opportunity to play for pay and forces them to go to college when they don't want to?


Just do what MLB and NHL do, and then there's nothing to whine about.

Why exactly should the NCAA change its approach just because the NBA and NFL want to force colleges to serve as their farm system?

[ClayK]

It's not about approach, it's about injustice.

A lot of people, mostly white, make a lot of money.

The people who generate that revenue don't get the same financial reward, whatever their color (though many are black).

When free agency came into professional sports, the market corrected many of the salary injustices. Put the market in college sports, and the same correction will occur.

And justice will be served -- or at least it will closer to the front of the buffet line.

_________________
Oṃ T�re Tutt�re Ture Sv�h�

[Youth Coach]

Bill Maher's problem is that like many other people making comments, they aren't always factually accurate.

That USA Today article about Wisconsin was an embarrassment and that it got published at all should be apologized for. Imagine if the article had asked why a school was starting four black players. The hue and cry would've brought the world to a standstill.

And Maher's quote, while likely drawing a laugh from his audience, conveniently ignores all the other races being exploited financially by the NCAA.

The only color being should be talking about when it comes to the NCAA and exploitation is GREEN.

_________________
The Cassette Chronicles #242 - Europe - The Final Countdown

CD Review - Judas Priest - Invincible Shield


Concert Review - Ronny Munroe's Holy Dio

[ArtBest23]

[chienboo]

Why does anyone listen to what Mahr has to say. He is an asshole....

[summertime blues]

[Richard 77]

[cthskzfn]

...it was a joke, and it was funny.

_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.

[cthskzfn]

[NickDMB]

[dtrain34]

...it was a joke, and it was funny.

I beg to differ. In my opinion, no joke that categorizes athletes by race is funny. It buys into a long-held stereotype and leaves the door open for far more insidious stereotypes -- and I am talking both about the Maher comment and the snickering about Wisconsin's lack of black starters.

(And since this is a women's basketball board, flip through the 2015 NCAA program and see how several teams of the 64 are ALL or close to all white. In the 21st Century. In basketball.)

My point is this: if you start to accept the frat boy's excuse for inability to play ball or dance or sing -- "hey, I'm WHITE, hahaha, ROTFLMAO, hahaha, yuck, yuck...." If you accept as gospel that basketball was somehow INTENDED as a black sport for whites to make money off because black players are just somehow better, it makes it easier to accept worse stereotypes about which races are smarter or worse drivers or lazier or.....?

European whites have little trouble advancing in basketball, top white male volleyball players have absurd hops. But the Mahers and USATodays of the world through their simplistic jokes reinforce ALL stereotypes, favorable or unfavorable to various ethnic groups.

[ArtBest23]

[ClayK]

Let's put it another way ...

Suppose that the market ruled college sports, and high school athletes were allowed to be paid whatever colleges wanted to pay them, and given whatever benefits colleges wanted to give them.

How much money would Jahlil Okafor been worth on the open market? How much would a top assistant coach be worth? How much would an athletic director be worth?

What professional sports have shown is that once the market begins to operate, the power and benefits shift to the players, who are the engines of the industry, and away from the administrators, who are in most cases fairly fungible.

That's the injustice of collegiate sports. Maybe if the market ruled, the players wouldn't get more than a scholarship, because that would be all they could negotiate for. But maybe not.

(It's interesting to me that the people who favor the present system are often conservative in their political views, which almost always means they feel the open market is the best way to run an economy and a business, but when it comes to collegiate sports, they want to restrain the market as much as possible.)

_________________
Oṃ T�re Tutt�re Ture Sv�h�

[hyperetic]

[ArtBest23]

[NickDMB]

[cthskzfn]

[ArtBest23]

[pilight]

[PUmatty]

These arguments almost always miss to essential points to this issue:

1. There is an outside-NBA market in basketball, of which the NCAA and their payment of athletic scholarships is one piece. Players have the option, for example of playing oversees. Elite players could sign with an agent, get paid to work out for one year, and then enter the draft. Virtually all make the rational choice (as in rational choice theories of economic) that the benefits of the NCAA are the best option. In a free market where these athletes can work virtually anywhere they want, virtually all freely choose an NCAA scholarship as the optimal payment for their labor.

2. An academic scholarship has value, both in real dollars at the time of awarding and in future earning potential. That the athletes are receiving real economic benefit for playing cannot be denied, and when we look at the way that improves later earnings, it is a significant economic benefit.

[ArtBest23]