(06-20-2020 06:13 PM)illiniowl Wrote: So under your plan Rice would field teams composed of nonstudent professional athletes under no obligation to attend the school at the time they're playing or even later? I can tell you the type of schools that would in fact be inclined to go along with this idea: the same ESUs that have corrupted the system to the extent it is now. It would be less of a leap for their fans to root for kids with no longer even the pretense of an actual connection to the school (what Seinfeld called "rooting for laundry").
It would just be easier for Rice to buy the Texans or Rockets or Astros and change the name and colors. There's a precedent in fact!
Pretty much, yeah. Rooting for laundry is essentially what most sports fans are doing, and it's a more honest approach to a fair solution that acknowledges the reality than the plantation system that exists under current NCAA. The myth of "amateurism" is just that: a myth. It basically functions as propaganda to provide cover for underpaying people for their valuable services and is exploitative at its core. The farce of allowing exemption from anti-trust laws so that colleges can screw over young people who happen to be blessed with various athletic talents seems kinda disgusting at best, especially in today's age of enlightenment.
I fail to see a downside in allowing schools with resources to compete on a level playing field. With the model I've suggested above that at its core recognizes the inherent fairness of paying players for their services at market value, Rice for one would be able to actually compete on equal footing with the ESUs, whatever they chose to do. How long has it been since that was truly possible? Many folks have complained in this very thread among umpteen others that they'd like a better way for Rice to actually compete against the biggest and best ESUs and have a real chance to win; with the model I've suggested that becomes totally possible (OK, we can't hire a coach who runs a country club instead of a football team, but at least we could finally get the horses we seldom have in the first place, and many have suggested that's more than half the battle.)
Of course, Rice would have to allow the true cost of those athletes' services to be paid in order to do so, but what real negative comes from hiring out the very best athletes in each sport if a school wishes to for them to wear the school's colors for four or five years? Say Rice wanted even a Zion Williamson to play basketball here? Highest bidder wins, and few schools, not even Duke could outbid us if we wanted to win. So what if the school is too tough for some or even most of the athletes we'd hire to play for us? They'd still have a shot at a degree, that would be equal and fair to other students, with the only advantage that they'd have a guaranteed entry initially when they chose to actually use the educational opportunity. What is the harm in them to choose when it is best for them to take their academic shot? If they flunk out, they do not harm the school in any way, as the service they provided more than makes up for their lack of staying power if that is the case. It was suggested above by another poster right away that many of the athletes if not most we currently have or have had in the recent past could not/do not meet the school's (Rice's) standards anyway.
We're not arguing if Rice is a whore (all the colleges and universities are, as well as being virtual slavemasters when it comes to athletes, which I happen to believe is wrong), we're just negotiating price. At least it's an honest transaction. Moreso, we actually provide an opportunity and an incentive that our athletes currently do not have: the freedom to decide when their best academic window exists as well as the flexibility to achieve it in a window without the stress of doing it concurrently with when their athletic peak occurs. A guarantee of a shot at a real education, as well as a provisional one-time transfer of that guarantee to a lesser school as long as they make the grade and the time window of up to five years paid finished within 10 years. And fairest of all, actual fair-market value payment for the very valuable services they do provide while they play.
That's the basic outline. We could make minor adjustments, of course, but that would be the most honest way to do this going forward. And with some effort and pledge of dollars behind it, Rice could make a serious, positive and honest impact in the athletic world instead of what we are doing now, which clearly is not working and hurts the school's overall brand and image. Compete with Texas and A&M again for best athletes and championships? Sure Rice could. They couldn't outbid us for everyone, we'd start winning, Rice Stadium would quickly be able to in some years fill all 70,000 seats again, get renovated, probably have a shot to outdraw the Texans, and we'd win some championships all of which would fit neatly into Rice's supposed "unconventional wisdom" slogan as well as return the value of the school's brand back to where it should be. Same for basketball and baseball, etc....
Look at howe the commenst are when one of "our" players leaves Rice early. Look at the before and afters on them. Sure, a few support them no matter where they go, most don;t care. This is a business, like it or not, and the more Rice has the freedom and balls to treat it like one without all the BS, the better the university, its students and its athletes collectively will fare. That brings in dollars, that is self-supportive, and that helps the school, and its alumns restore value to the brand in today's marketplace, which is bottom line what it's all about. Sports teams at universities on the top levels exist primarily as marketing tools for their school's brand. That's why they are so valuable. Intramurals exists for amateurism. Nothing in the model I've suggested precludes intramurals from continuing to exist.
You don't like paying people for their work or services fairly? When
is the last time you refused your paycheck, or told your boss, 'Hey, don't pay me what I'm worth, pay me peanuts and put in a lot of extra restrictions like if I get hurt or you find someone younger or with more eligibility than me I get no compensation or guarantees, just kick me to the curb.' Sorry, I'm an American not a communist and I don't believe in slavery in any form. The solution I've offered solves those issues and helps Rice and all of its past, present and future alumni. And who knows? It would actually have a real shot at changing things for these athletes for the better, and isn't that something we could all be proud of?