They are not professional athletes since they are not being paid for their on field performance.

(07-26-2021 06:49 AM)Purple Wrote:  I wonder if academic standards will fall for "student-athletes" because they are no longer student-athletes, but, rather, professional athletes. I think so. After all, who cares about their grades, these are professionals. Why should they even be required to go to class?

The whole development is very sad in my opinion. How many millions will be thrown at five-star kids to pretend to be college students?

If you really think 5 star kids are treated as normal students currently, I have a bridge to sell you

(07-26-2021 11:25 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 06:49 AM)Purple Wrote:  I wonder if academic standards will fall for "student-athletes" because they are no longer student-athletes, but, rather, professional athletes. I think so. After all, who cares about their grades, these are professionals. Why should they even be required to go to class?

The whole development is very sad in my opinion. How many millions will be thrown at five-star kids to pretend to be college students?

If you really think 5 star kids are treated as normal students currently, I have a bridge to sell you

I don't think his argument was that "student-athletes", especially those at big name schools playing football and men's basketball, are your typical college students. I think the logic to the argument is that the remaining guardrails to give collegiate athletics some aura of amateurism are now even going to be dwindled further than it already is. I also agree for the most part. I get that these are not typical kids, but I want to watch college football and not the minor league NFL.

I guess it's a matter of perception. I have thought of P5 (and a fair number of G5 teams) as minor league NFL for a long while now. Kudos to you for holding out this long.

Long, long ago, when I accepted an appointment at JMU, my best friend, college roommate at Texas and teammate on our High School football team asked me if JMU played football. I told him JMU played D1-AA (the terminology used at the time). My friend replied, “Oh, JMU plays college football, not professional college football.”

He had it right then, and that comment is even more spot-on today.

Go Dukes!

(07-26-2021 11:25 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 06:49 AM)Purple Wrote:  I wonder if academic standards will fall for "student-athletes" because they are no longer student-athletes, but, rather, professional athletes. I think so. After all, who cares about their grades, these are professionals. Why should they even be required to go to class?

The whole development is very sad in my opinion. How many millions will be thrown at five-star kids to pretend to be college students?

If you really think 5 star kids are treated as normal students currently, I have a bridge to sell you

You missed my point entirely, then agreed with it. No surprise.

(07-26-2021 04:12 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 11:25 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 06:49 AM)Purple Wrote:  I wonder if academic standards will fall for "student-athletes" because they are no longer student-athletes, but, rather, professional athletes. I think so. After all, who cares about their grades, these are professionals. Why should they even be required to go to class?

The whole development is very sad in my opinion. How many millions will be thrown at five-star kids to pretend to be college students?

If you really think 5 star kids are treated as normal students currently, I have a bridge to sell you

I don't think his argument was that "student-athletes", especially those at big name schools playing football and men's basketball, are your typical college students. I think the logic to the argument is that the remaining guardrails to give collegiate athletics some aura of amateurism are now even going to be dwindled further than it already is. I also agree for the most part. I get that these are not typical kids, but I want to watch college football and not the minor league NFL.

Thank you. You get it. And thanks for explaining it to fishy. I hope he now also gets it.

(07-26-2021 10:34 PM)Purple Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 04:12 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 11:25 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  

(07-26-2021 06:49 AM)Purple Wrote:  I wonder if academic standards will fall for "student-athletes" because they are no longer student-athletes, but, rather, professional athletes. I think so. After all, who cares about their grades, these are professionals. Why should they even be required to go to class?

The whole development is very sad in my opinion. How many millions will be thrown at five-star kids to pretend to be college students?

If you really think 5 star kids are treated as normal students currently, I have a bridge to sell you

I don't think his argument was that "student-athletes", especially those at big name schools playing football and men's basketball, are your typical college students. I think the logic to the argument is that the remaining guardrails to give collegiate athletics some aura of amateurism are now even going to be dwindled further than it already is. I also agree for the most part. I get that these are not typical kids, but I want to watch college football and not the minor league NFL.

Thank you. You get it. And thanks for explaining it to fishy. I hope he now also gets it.

Again NIL has zero to do with the university and their standards. Colleges and the NCAA are not paying these kids to play football and there will still be academic probations and other rules violations within programs. In fact this allows athletes to have the same opportunities that the rest of the kids on campus do.

I just don't think any of the things people are worried about(finding ways to pay players tons of money, letting bad academics slide, etc.) are going to change much if at all. When people are afraid of those things changing, it makes me think they don't realize how much the things they're worried about are already happening.

In my opinion, it's not NIL that's going to cause major changes that are only good for the biggest fish but maybe this round of conference realignment. I guess maybe NIL could've impacted that, kind of an "oh no, now players can get legit money anywhere instead of just getting money if they play for us, we better separate ourselves another way." But they probably would've gone the way they're going either way.

(07-27-2021 06:00 AM)fishingduke12 Wrote:  Again NIL has zero to do with the university and their standards. Colleges and the NCAA are not paying these kids to play football and there will still be academic probations and other rules violations within programs. In fact this allows athletes to have the same opportunities that the rest of the kids on campus do.

We know this to be true. I’ll argue the dissenters on this thread, in their hearts, know this to be true as well.

We’re just seeing a bunch of dusty old “back in my day the only compensation we got was a swift kick in the ass from the coach and WE WERE BETTER FOR IT” hot takes under the extremely thin veneer of phony concern for the sanctity of the student athlete.

I am not against the NIL at all and believe that athletes should have a chance to profit off of their likeness but this creates an interesting wrinkle. Happy that these athletes are getting a free education while getting to play a sport these love but what does this mean down the road for scholarship limits if adopted by giants with big pockets like Alabama, Clemson, Oregon, etc.?

Kind of flies in the face of the spirit of the ruling though. A walk on is in no position on their own to profit from their likeness. This is just the system (more money than these schools need, more money from donors than is needed) propping up a bunch of kids and circumventing the scholarship limits.

Same underlying reason why these schools have so many new buildings and complexes too-good problem to have (too much money) if you are one of the big boys. It will just create further separation in tiers so barring some kind of salary cap type structure or more equal distribution (revenue sharing) between schools the mid major will be further away from the major. Maybe in the past your choice as a fringe player was try to walk on at a big school or take the scholarship a mid major- now they have equalized the financial part of the decision. I know sometimes there are more variables like playing time being the man etc but still it’s a bad start of a bad trend IMO.

Good point, as scholarship limits were put into place to even the playing field. Also, recruiting classes were eventually limited to 25 in a given season due to schools like Ole Miss (Houston Nutt) would sign say 35 recruits and then sort it out by the season. That limited how many available kids trickled down, plus a handful of kids would get purged from the program to make room. If they can now sign 25 recruits and have 10-15 forgo a scholarship because some booster will provide it for them such as this at BYU, we’re right back at it with the rich getting richer and the playing field slanted.

And 36 walk-ons??? They get 85 scholarships so now they have 121 players on their team? That’s probably 2 dozen more than usual. Not to mention their players are usually much older due to the redshirt and/or 2 year mission.

(08-13-2021 09:14 AM)Polish Hammer Wrote:  Good point, as scholarship limits were put into place to even the playing field. Also, recruiting classes were eventually limited to 25 in a given season due to schools like Ole Miss (Houston Nutt) would sign say 35 recruits and then sort it out by the season. That limited how many available kids trickled down, plus a handful of kids would get purged from the program to make room. If they can now sign 25 recruits and have 10-15 forgo a scholarship because some booster will provide it for them such as this at BYU, we’re right back at it with the rich getting richer and the playing field slanted.

And 36 walk-ons??? They get 85 scholarships so now they have 121 players on their team? That’s probably 2 dozen more than usual. Not to mention their players are usually much older due to the redshirt and/or 2 year mission.

I think that is typical. 85 scholarships, 105 on roster, 125 players max. I'm not totally up on the logistics, but I believe the idea is that you can have 105 on the roster, which is the guys that can play during the season, and then you can have another 20 that show up to practice but watch the games from the stands.

I guess it has to do with COVID eligibility changes, but Clemson is showing 131 on there team right now.
https://clemsontigers.com/sports/football/roster/

Now this makes sense and feels like what NIL should be. Perhaps JMU will follow suit

https://hokiesports.com/news/2022/2/11/v...rseys.aspx

Absolutely. Hopefully shirseys too.

(02-12-2022 08:35 AM)Hart Foundation Wrote:  Now this makes sense and feels like what NIL should be. Perhaps JMU will follow suit

https://hokiesports.com/news/2022/2/11/v...rseys.aspx

Completely agree. This is what I envisioned NIL being not the wild Wild West but guess I should have known better. Thanks for sharing.

Rattler cashing in:

https://www.on3.com/teams/south-carolina...-football/

I hope he has a good tax accountant that is not a cheap ride.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

(02-25-2022 06:02 PM)JMU85 Wrote:  Rattler cashing in:

https://www.on3.com/teams/south-carolina...-football/

I hope he has a good tax accountant that is not a cheap ride.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk

I don't have a clue what these arrangements are, but if they form a corporation, I can see a vehicle being given to the business and returned each year without any income tax ramifications.

From the Athletic so take it with a grain of salt.

https://usatodayhss.com/2022/class-2023-...-agreement