CSNbbs

Stupid move. Napier was playing politics. If he went to bed hungry it is because he CHOSE not to eat what was prepared for the athletes.

Between meals at home and meal money on the road they get close to $700 a month for food. Now certain schools will be giving athletes enough "meal money" so the players can have lobster at every meal.

So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

steak and lobster time at some institutions now

(04-16-2014 06:31 AM)Pressed Rat Wrote: [ -> ]So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

Thing is they won't eat. They take the increased meal money and pocket it. Spend $20 a day on fast food then pocket the other $100-$130 a day. If you want to address the problem then you open up the rules on how the school can feed them, not open up the rule as to how much meal money they can get. UNLIMITED meal money means they can give the player a $1000 a day meal money if they wish. Someone leaves a paper trail and you find a kid somehow comes in to $100,000 then it can always be declared meal money.

Students athletes have meals available to them on campus and get decent meal money on the road if they do not waste it on a single meal. Or use it to purchase other items instead. Current max meal money is set at $35 per day for most days. That can be increased to $45 per day in cities where the cost of living is high. Then during NCAA Championship competition such as bowl game or tournaments they also get $20 a day for incidental expenses. So on the day that Napier complained about going to bed hungry at the NCAA finals. He potentially got $65 a day over the past 4 days for food and expenses. Potentially he received $260 for those four days

Things have changed. When I was in college the athletes ate at the same "cafeteria" as the other students. However football and basketball players ate different on game day (home games).

I know back then the cafeteria closed about 6:30 pm. And as we all know a 19-21 year old can eat all day and most of us were hungry again by 9-10 pm. So, we made trips to McDonald's, ordered pizzas or made frequent trips to the vending machines.

Back in the day, they had training tables where the athletes were fed accordingly to maintain or gain weight and to burn energy. I guess those don't exist anymore?

(04-16-2014 08:56 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 06:31 AM)Pressed Rat Wrote: [ -> ]So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

Thing is they won't eat. They take the increased meal money and pocket it. Spend $20 a day on fast food then pocket the other $100-$130 a day. If you want to address the problem then you open up the rules on how the school can feed them, not open up the rule as to how much meal money they can get. UNLIMITED meal money means they can give the player a $1000 a day meal money if they wish. Someone leaves a paper trail and you find a kid somehow comes in to $100,000 then it can always be declared meal money.

Students athletes have meals available to them on campus and get decent meal money on the road if they do not waste it on a single meal. Or use it to purchase other items instead. Current max meal money is set at $35 per day for most days. That can be increased to $45 per day in cities where the cost of living is high. Then during NCAA Championship competition such as bowl game or tournaments they also get $20 a day for incidental expenses. So on the day that Napier complained about going to bed hungry at the NCAA finals. He potentially got $65 a day over the past 4 days for food and expenses. Potentially he received $260 for those four days

Was he speaking about being hungry at the NCAA or just in general as a student?

He probably never literally went hungry, but just made a point against the NCAA that denied his team an invitation to the 2013 tourney because they school didn't push enough of the students to graduate.

(04-16-2014 08:56 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 06:31 AM)Pressed Rat Wrote: [ -> ]So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

Thing is they won't eat. They take the increased meal money and pocket it. Spend $20 a day on fast food then pocket the other $100-$130 a day. If you want to address the problem then you open up the rules on how the school can feed them, not open up the rule as to how much meal money they can get. UNLIMITED meal money means they can give the player a $1000 a day meal money if they wish. Someone leaves a paper trail and you find a kid somehow comes in to $100,000 then it can always be declared meal money.

Students athletes have meals available to them on campus and get decent meal money on the road if they do not waste it on a single meal. Or use it to purchase other items instead. Current max meal money is set at $35 per day for most days. That can be increased to $45 per day in cities where the cost of living is high. Then during NCAA Championship competition such as bowl game or tournaments they also get $20 a day for incidental expenses. So on the day that Napier complained about going to bed hungry at the NCAA finals. He potentially got $65 a day over the past 4 days for food and expenses. Potentially he received $260 for those four days

The increase seems to me to be access to actual food not 'unlimited meal money.'

"The proposal would allow Division I schools to provide unlimited meals and snacks to all athletes, including walk-ons."

(04-16-2014 10:21 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 08:56 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 06:31 AM)Pressed Rat Wrote: [ -> ]So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

Thing is they won't eat. They take the increased meal money and pocket it. Spend $20 a day on fast food then pocket the other $100-$130 a day. If you want to address the problem then you open up the rules on how the school can feed them, not open up the rule as to how much meal money they can get. UNLIMITED meal money means they can give the player a $1000 a day meal money if they wish. Someone leaves a paper trail and you find a kid somehow comes in to $100,000 then it can always be declared meal money.

Students athletes have meals available to them on campus and get decent meal money on the road if they do not waste it on a single meal. Or use it to purchase other items instead. Current max meal money is set at $35 per day for most days. That can be increased to $45 per day in cities where the cost of living is high. Then during NCAA Championship competition such as bowl game or tournaments they also get $20 a day for incidental expenses. So on the day that Napier complained about going to bed hungry at the NCAA finals. He potentially got $65 a day over the past 4 days for food and expenses. Potentially he received $260 for those four days

The increase seems to me to be access to actual food not 'unlimited meal money.'

"The proposal would allow Division I schools to provide unlimited meals and snacks to all athletes, including walk-ons."

Of course...

The change isn't going to allow a school to give kids $1000 a day and call it meal money. There will be limits. Why would anyone be against kids getting food? Of course, we are talking about someone who complained that Coach Fuente likes Arby's sauce...so people complain about ridiculous things.

(04-16-2014 10:29 AM)SigEpMike Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 10:21 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 08:56 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 06:31 AM)Pressed Rat Wrote: [ -> ]So what? Who cares how much they eat? The main concern for money is 250 grand a year under the table. Everything else is pocket change.

Thing is they won't eat. They take the increased meal money and pocket it. Spend $20 a day on fast food then pocket the other $100-$130 a day. If you want to address the problem then you open up the rules on how the school can feed them, not open up the rule as to how much meal money they can get. UNLIMITED meal money means they can give the player a $1000 a day meal money if they wish. Someone leaves a paper trail and you find a kid somehow comes in to $100,000 then it can always be declared meal money.

Students athletes have meals available to them on campus and get decent meal money on the road if they do not waste it on a single meal. Or use it to purchase other items instead. Current max meal money is set at $35 per day for most days. That can be increased to $45 per day in cities where the cost of living is high. Then during NCAA Championship competition such as bowl game or tournaments they also get $20 a day for incidental expenses. So on the day that Napier complained about going to bed hungry at the NCAA finals. He potentially got $65 a day over the past 4 days for food and expenses. Potentially he received $260 for those four days

The increase seems to me to be access to actual food not 'unlimited meal money.'

"The proposal would allow Division I schools to provide unlimited meals and snacks to all athletes, including walk-ons."

Of course...

The change isn't going to allow a school to give kids $1000 a day and call it meal money. There will be limits. Why would anyone be against kids getting food? Of course, we are talking about someone who complained that Coach Fuente likes Arby's sauce...so people complain about ridiculous things.

I don't think anyone is against a kid eating. I think it's more about "how much of an issue is this really?". From my limited understanding, food has always been readily available, though some stupid rules limited what some could be (so good for those changes). But I liken it more to "We didn't want to eat THAT" as opposed to "we didn't have enough to eat".

If it isnt really an issue then there is no reason not to repeal the stupid, useless rule.

(04-16-2014 01:40 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]Stupid move. Napier was playing politics. If he went to bed hungry it is because he CHOSE not to eat what was prepared for the athletes.

Between meals at home and meal money on the road they get close to $700 a month for food. Now certain schools will be giving athletes enough "meal money" so the players can have lobster at every meal.

is this sarcasm? it's hard to tell around here sometimes

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college...z2z4UTq8Fi

"• Memphis: With Gus's Fried Chicken and a bevy of dry-rubbed deliciousness at any number of quality barbecue joints, the Tigers should be national title contenders within three years."

Gummy bears were always available in the candy machines. I don't know why Napier went to bed hungry.

I consider this a new recruiting opportunity for Calipari ...

so we can't make fun of the cream cheese rule anymore?

The old rule was ridiculous where they could have bagels as a snack but cream cheese made it a meal. This move is a no brainer.

Also, I hope no one believed that dude went to bed hungry. It was dumb for him to even say that.

Oh good grief. No D-1 Athlete that I have ever known, went to bed hungry. I they they did, it was because of all there fat friend who stole/ate the food……who should not have. Absolutely absurd statement by a D-1 player.

(04-16-2014 11:53 AM)tigersgrizzfan Wrote: [ -> ]

(04-16-2014 01:40 AM)ncrdbl1 Wrote: [ -> ]Stupid move. Napier was playing politics. If he went to bed hungry it is because he CHOSE not to eat what was prepared for the athletes.

Between meals at home and meal money on the road they get close to $700 a month for food. Now certain schools will be giving athletes enough "meal money" so the players can have lobster at every meal.

is this sarcasm? it's hard to tell around here sometimes

Sarcasm on the last sentence but on the rest....that is how the game is played.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk