John Oliver goes in on The NCAA
- Thread starter The War Report
- Start date
Your stance is uninformed, the NCAA is actively working with the NBA to raise the age limit, yet here you are talking out your ass about going pro after HS, even though the leagues in question don't want that and are working in conjunction with the NCAA to make sure that doesn't happen.
fukking moron.
Way to stay on topic
Why would I have to be white to oppose paying college athletes who make the choice to play D-1 sports at no cost to themselves?
*sigh*
How the fukk is my stance uninformed? This doesn't even make sense.
Do you read what I post? I'm really curious because i've said this multiple times.
I KNOW THIS.
But if you want to get me to agree, in this argument, to anything you need to get the NCAA to remove the barrier to going pro.
Thats my view.
So narrow your argument to address that.
Paying these kids isn't going to fix that.
I support lowering the age limit and have said that since page 1.
As if ANYONE on this forum could convince you to change your asinine stance?Way to stay on topic
you're going to defend your stupid ass position until the end of time, so why would I bother actually debating with you? There is a reason EVERYONE in this thread is disagreeing with you and there is a reason you have the WOAT tags that you do. Maybe you need to look at yourself in the mirror.I'm done in here.
I'm just repeating myself and I'm not going to change my mind on the subject.
I've listed my proposed reforms and I've listed what I support and don't support around the program.
Ultimately, I hope the NCAA will take the necessary steps to ensure amateur athletes are NOT compensated for participating in sports and I hope that specific reforms are undertaken to address present flaws in the system.
What I'd really enjoy is to know that those who disagree with me at least respect the integrity of the thoughtfulness and breadth of how I've defended my argument and addressed specific nuances throughout this topic.
I'm just repeating myself and I'm not going to change my mind on the subject.
I've listed my proposed reforms and I've listed what I support and don't support around the program.
Ultimately, I hope the NCAA will take the necessary steps to ensure amateur athletes are NOT compensated for participating in sports and I hope that specific reforms are undertaken to address present flaws in the system.
What I'd really enjoy is to know that those who disagree with me at least respect the integrity of the thoughtfulness and breadth of how I've defended my argument and addressed specific nuances throughout this topic.
literally laughed out loud when I read this.
I care about athletes getting rewarded for what they do for the university. Clearly water polo isn't bringing in the money that football is, so I wouldn't expect the goalie of the water polo team to deserve the same kind of reimbursement the QB of the football team does.
On one hand this is "amateur sports", and on the other hand Texas A&M is a "sports franchise"
Sports franchises are big business, for the sole purpose of making money. That's not amateur sports. You can't have it both ways. So which is it?
Popularity doesn't need to be rewarded, production needs to be rewarded. Results need to be rewarded. Everyone gets rewarded for their results in this "amateur sport" except the athlete. The chancellor/president makes six-seven figures to find the right athletic director run a profitable department (on the backs of the athletes), the AD makes six-seven figures to find the right head coach to bring in the right players to make the department money (on the backs of the players), and then the coach himself gets seven figures to go find talented players to do the work that makes everyone else millions of dollars, for free.
Of course it matters. They're not all equal representatives because they're not both giving the same amount of production, and producing the same financial results. A great QB for a football team brings in hundreds of millions of dollars, and also makes that university more attractive to future quarterbacks who will come and make more millions for that university. A great cello player, once again, cannot even compare to this. They are both talented, but RESULTS MATTER.
How can you say they are getting all their financial needs taken care of when players admit they go to sleep hungry cause they can't afford food? When athletes are literally homeless and would get in trouble if someone so much as bought lunch for them? It's great that NCAA has an exemption waiver you can apply for to help that homeless athlete out, but the fact that it even GETS to that point shows you how fukked up this whole system is to begin with.
Exactly, they are disposable pieces of meat. If they don't want to do all the extra work to make everyone else rich, the university will go find someone else to do it.
Really? So if you walk into Autzen Stadium and see 50,000 Mariota jerseys, you're going to tell me he isn't the face of that program?
Makes it easier.
The standards aren't the same. It's not that black and white. Nobody in that university is asked to do as much as a student athlete.
How is it not relevant? YOU are the one who said they are high school athletes on a higher level. Now you're saying that's not relevant?
But you do support other students, their coaches, their AD, chancellor, president, stadium workers, merchandise companies, apparel companies... basically everyone else, being compensated for the work that athlete does.
Seems legit.
today he is a rich conservative white man, tomorrow he'll be the second coming of huey p newton
Then you're a fukking uncle tom and a c00n. And I no longer respect anything you have say
Ignored.
Napoleon acts like we're asking these athletes to be paid 100grand a year or some shyt
we're literally talking about a weekly stipend so these athletes can afford to eat out or go out with their friends or even send the money back to their family. A lot of division 1 athletes come from poverty. Eric Bledsoe was living out of his car when he came to Kentucky, the university and the NCAA directly profited from him and YOU deemed they "aren't worth paying"? go suck a dikk breh
we're literally talking about a weekly stipend so these athletes can afford to eat out or go out with their friends or even send the money back to their family. A lot of division 1 athletes come from poverty. Eric Bledsoe was living out of his car when he came to Kentucky, the university and the NCAA directly profited from him and YOU deemed they "aren't worth paying"?
go suck a dikk breh
The thing that makes me laugh most in all this shyt is hiding behind the term "Amateur sports" like it still applies to the multi-billion dollar business that is college athletics.
Amateur sports is the local bail bondsman or real estate company paying a few hundred bucks to buy uniforms for the local little league team, and then parents paying money that goes directly into concession stands, buying field time, keeping lights on for night games, etc. Not into the pockets of people who sit in an office and do nothing but rake in millions. That's amateur fukking sports. This shyt the NCAA is running is a billion dollar business.
Amateur sports is the local bail bondsman or real estate company paying a few hundred bucks to buy uniforms for the local little league team, and then parents paying money that goes directly into concession stands, buying field time, keeping lights on for night games, etc. Not into the pockets of people who sit in an office and do nothing but rake in millions. That's amateur fukking sports. This shyt the NCAA is running is a billion dollar business.