|
Post by dude on Oct 4, 2019 13:18:43 GMT -5
I never stated he didn't have some popularity, but without a doubt having Duke across his chest put advanced him a couple tax brackets. Do you really believe he would be in the same seat today had he worn VCU on his chest last season? My point does not matter which school he chose, it's that he could have been making money off his previously gained popularity My point was is has the ability to gain more money and has benefited now that he has attended Duke for a year.
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 4, 2019 13:20:29 GMT -5
So someone like Zion Williamson would have been a nobody but because he went to Duke he became famous? Yes.
|
|
tori2
All Conference
2017 Playoff Pick'em Champion
Posts: 312
|
Post by tori2 on Oct 4, 2019 13:27:54 GMT -5
I guess l live under a rock.
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Oct 4, 2019 13:39:21 GMT -5
it kills me how DEM socialists will cry that capitalism is evil and unfair on one thread, then jump on here say that grown bum bum men should be able to make all the $$ they want for themselves good golly i'm not a Dem or a Socialist rofl! Good lord. Never said you were, just made a generalization about people of a particular political persuasion, just like you did! Good gravy.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 4, 2019 15:00:57 GMT -5
Yes Duke made him even more popular and increased his likeness, but he was already popular and had a valuable likeness and could have has opportunities to make money off his likeness before getting there. Duke is not the reason he his valuable, players like him are the reason Duke is. I never stated he didn't have some popularity, but without a doubt having Duke across his chest put advanced him a couple tax brackets. Do you really believe he would be in the same seat today had he worn VCU on his chest last season? Ja Morant is in nearly the exact same seat coming out of Murray State boss.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 4, 2019 15:02:50 GMT -5
I guess l live under a rock. of course you do, UM fans have no reason to come out from under it either
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 4, 2019 15:03:46 GMT -5
i'm not a Dem or a Socialist rofl! Good lord. Never said you were, just made a generalization about people of a particular political persuasion, just like you did! Good gravy. then why quote me? the internet is tough on you Baby Boomers, eh?
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 4, 2019 15:06:24 GMT -5
If "amateur" college athletics as we know it will change forever for SOME. Then the following should also change. The NFL and the NBA must pay their minor leagues(colleges) for developing their talent. College football and basketball players that make 6 figures+ from their likenesses will no longer have their tuition and room and board paid for. Be honest, their likenesses would not be worth much if not for the college name, uniforms, coaching, training, the college's department of sports information that promote players for all-league, All-American and national position awards AND the other players around them that make them look good. If the above and athletes then say, why should we go to classes. OK, then these 6 figure players must pay the college to play for their athletic teams. Just like they pay for personal trainers and QB guru's to improve their draft stock. It's a two way street. Coaches can't make a name for themselves without good players. Many schools can't make themselves nationally renown without a good football team (think Boise State). They work together to make a product that makes money. Any part that is missing reduces the value of everyone. It's also silly using this logic, considering you wouldn't use this with other jobs. Should a journalist who covers the Brown's pay the Browns to cover them? That journalist would be worth nothing without the team to cover. Should I pay my employer for training me on the tools needed in order to do my job and be productive? I agree that players shouldn't get free tuition or room and board, but to say they should pay the school to play for them is absurd. They would be defined as employees of a company, not subscribers of a training service. Jim, if "student athletes" just wanted to be athletes and not students AND making 6 figure monies from their likenesses, at the same time taking advantaged of what a top football program provides, then why shouldn't they pay for their "training" like other skilled tradesmen? All Boise State had to do was get on TV once. I remember nothing about the game or any of their players, but their BLUE field is indelibly imprinted in my mind. Also Jim. Athletes would not necessarily have to be considered real employees, they could be considered contract employees. If they make money from their likeness, the University will not be responsible for taxes, or fringe benefits. As a matter of fact the University could make them pay for their uniforms. In which case thy could deduct the cost on their taxes. Has anyone mentioned to these athletes that they WILL have to hire an accountant and a business manager for the business they will be running on their likeness while in college?? FORGET ABOUT THEM being "student athletes". They will be embarking on a 6 figure business career at 18, with ZERO experience in running a business. Which will be FAR MORE scary for them then just playing a game.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 4, 2019 15:17:41 GMT -5
I never stated he didn't have some popularity, but without a doubt having Duke across his chest put advanced him a couple tax brackets. Do you really believe he would be in the same seat today had he worn VCU on his chest last season? My point does not matter which school he chose, it's that he could have been making money off his previously gained popularity JEEESSHHH!!!! Surely you jest! Zion's other choices instead of Duke or one of the other one year blue blood basketball programs were....the D-League, playing in Europe or sitting home playing video games for one year before entering the NBA draft. 99.99% of the people in the country won't see him doing those 3 things like they do wearing a Duke jersey. He could make 6+ figures on his likeness playing for Duke, zero for his likeness doing any of his other 3 options.
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 4, 2019 16:08:57 GMT -5
I never stated he didn't have some popularity, but without a doubt having Duke across his chest put advanced him a couple tax brackets. Do you really believe he would be in the same seat today had he worn VCU on his chest last season? Ja Morant is in nearly the exact same seat coming out of Murray State boss. Excellent point. Nobody had heard of this guy before his soph year of college and he wasn't even listed by most recruiting sites going into college. Thanks boss.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 4, 2019 17:19:26 GMT -5
you asked if Zion would be in the same seat today if he had worn VCU on his chest and the answer is yes, he would be exactly where he is today, the #1 overall pick in the NBA draft
stay on topic sir
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Oct 5, 2019 7:49:48 GMT -5
Never said you were, just made a generalization about people of a particular political persuasion, just like you did! Good gravy. then why quote me? the internet is tough on you Baby Boomers, eh? When contrasting your absurd generalization with the flip side of your point, quoting was easier than typing it out, as it is now. The internet is a piece of cake compared to the forms of communication previous to it, sonny.
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 5, 2019 7:57:08 GMT -5
seems to be a struggle for you because the people whom my post was meant for know who they are
with one exception it would appear
|
|
|
Post by fbfan on Oct 5, 2019 8:22:40 GMT -5
The generalization you made interested me and this is a public forum. Maybe try a PM to send your message if you are not entertained by this, that's why I'm on here. As it appears you are annoyed, you get the last word.
|
|
tori2
All Conference
2017 Playoff Pick'em Champion
Posts: 312
|
Post by tori2 on Oct 5, 2019 9:46:12 GMT -5
I guess l live under a rock. of course you do, UM fans have no reason to come out from under it either Ha ha
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Oct 5, 2019 10:40:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by DrTorch on Oct 5, 2019 13:14:20 GMT -5
The generalization you made interested me and this is a public forum. Maybe try a PM to send your message if you are not entertained by this, that's why I'm on here. As it appears you are annoyed, you get the last word. nah i'm just an a$$hole, comes from upbringing...my parents were a$$holes too
|
|
|
Post by maplecityjake on Oct 5, 2019 13:45:21 GMT -5
The generalization you made interested me and this is a public forum. Maybe try a PM to send your message if you are not entertained by this, that's why I'm on here. As it appears you are annoyed, you get the last word. nah i'm just an a$$hole, comes from upbringing...my parents were a$$holes too My favorite quote when I worked in Corrections: "Jake, you're an jack wagon. But, the reason I respect you because you're a consistent jack wagon."
|
|
|
Post by dude on Oct 5, 2019 14:15:16 GMT -5
you asked if Zion would be in the same seat today if he had worn VCU on his chest and the answer is yes, he would be exactly where he is today, the #1 overall pick in the NBA draft stay on topic sir I disagree and the fact that Ja Morant had to play 2 season before anyone heard his name nation wide proves it. Once Zion committed to Duke, the Nation heard his name before his first ACC game.
|
|
|
Post by heresjim on Oct 5, 2019 15:51:05 GMT -5
It's a two way street. Coaches can't make a name for themselves without good players. Many schools can't make themselves nationally renown without a good football team (think Boise State). They work together to make a product that makes money. Any part that is missing reduces the value of everyone. It's also silly using this logic, considering you wouldn't use this with other jobs. Should a journalist who covers the Brown's pay the Browns to cover them? That journalist would be worth nothing without the team to cover. Should I pay my employer for training me on the tools needed in order to do my job and be productive? I agree that players shouldn't get free tuition or room and board, but to say they should pay the school to play for them is absurd. They would be defined as employees of a company, not subscribers of a training service. Jim, if "student athletes" just wanted to be athletes and not students AND making 6 figure monies from their likenesses, at the same time taking advantaged of what a top football program provides, then why shouldn't they pay for their "training" like other skilled tradesmen? All Boise State had to do was get on TV once. I remember nothing about the game or any of their players, but their BLUE field is indelibly imprinted in my mind. Also Jim. Athletes would not necessarily have to be considered real employees, they could be considered contract employees. If they make money from their likeness, the University will not be responsible for taxes, or fringe benefits. As a matter of fact the University could make them pay for their uniforms. In which case thy could deduct the cost on their taxes. Has anyone mentioned to these athletes that they WILL have to hire an accountant and a business manager for the business they will be running on their likeness while in college?? FORGET ABOUT THEM being "student athletes". They will be embarking on a 6 figure business career at 18, with ZERO experience in running a business. Which will be FAR MORE scary for them then just playing a game. The schools that want to compete will consider their players real employees, and they will provide the resources for kids to manage their image. The schools that are going to be taking advantage of their kids, reducing their income potential, and charging the kids to play for them are going to struggle. When I was trying get my CDL to drive during the summer breaks between college semesters, I went with the company that trained me for free and paid for my cdl. The other company that I approached was going to charge me ... and they were still looking for drivers a couple months later. That is why the logic doesn't work, because there is enough competition to make them behave in a way that is going to favorable in attracting athletes.
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 6, 2019 13:25:15 GMT -5
"Real Employees" of ALL colleges and universities either pay into a pension fund or are given a pension. Many employees of universities and colleges belong to unions and have union dues deducted from their checks. Local, state and federal taxes are deducted from checks.
BUT WAIT!!!
These athletes will be making CASH by signing autographs. Make CASH by selling pictures of themselves in uniforms. Get CHECKS from companies that make and sell jerseys with their names on them. Get CHECKS from shoe companies and other companies that want to use their likenesses.
How in the heck is that being a "real" employee of a college or university if they aren't paying them anything??
When you were a truck driver during the summer, what in the heck did that have to do with the college you attended the other 9 months of the year?!?!?
There is NO WAY, these kids are going to want colleges managing THEIR MONEY, made from THEIR likenesses, when the schools have nothing to do with the money they make.
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Oct 6, 2019 14:44:28 GMT -5
Collegiate athletes are no more employees than any other student on scholarship. To suggest otherwise is absurd. Still think, ultimately, the compromising solution will be mandating all student athletes that benefit from endorsements or name recognition, must put them into a trust, till after graduation or he/she is no longer a student.
|
|
|
Post by heresjim on Oct 6, 2019 16:56:48 GMT -5
Collegiate athletes are no more employees than any other student on scholarship. To suggest otherwise is absurd. Still think, ultimately, the compromising solution will be mandating all student athletes that benefit from endorsements or name recognition, must put them into a trust, till after graduation or he/she is no longer a student. I think we should finally transition these kids away from being students. They shouldn't get scholarships, they shouldn't get their room and board paid for, they shouldn't go to class, they should just be athletes getting paid to generate revenue for the school. For those athletes that don't produce revenue, their sport won't exist at the collegiate level. If that's unfair for sports played by women, than don't have collegiate sports I guess. Club sports will still exist, but any kind of system where athletes are forced to put in hours comparable to a full time job (while earning money for their school) should be considered a job to prevent exploitation.
|
|
|
Post by heresjim on Oct 6, 2019 17:06:50 GMT -5
"Real Employees" of ALL colleges and universities either pay into a pension fund or are given a pension. Many employees of universities and colleges belong to unions and have union dues deducted from their checks. Local, state and federal taxes are deducted from checks. BUT WAIT!!! These athletes will be making CASH by signing autographs. Make CASH by selling pictures of themselves in uniforms. Get CHECKS from companies that make and sell jerseys with their names on them. Get CHECKS from shoe companies and other companies that want to use their likenesses. How in the heck is that being a "real" employee of a college or university if they aren't paying them anything?? When you were a truck driver during the summer, what in the heck did that have to do with the college you attended the other 9 months of the year?!?!? There is NO WAY, these kids are going to want colleges managing THEIR MONEY, made from THEIR likenesses, when the schools have nothing to do with the money they make. I'm not saying that is happening now (or in the near future), I'm saying that is what will likely happen in the future. Yes, treat them like real employees (have them pay taxes, pay into their pension, whatever). And in regards to whether these kids are going utilize those resources, it's just something I could see schools doing to make their players lives easier. Companies provide benefits that are favorable to employees sometimes, so I don't see why schools would NEVER even contemplate it. Also, this likely wouldn't be mandatory, I'm sure kids would manage their image and hire the necessary help if they wanted to do it themselves. We are both just speculating here...
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 7, 2019 12:04:12 GMT -5
Jim, once again you are clueless.
Give us ONE example of ANY entity in the country that does not pay an individual yet that person is in their pension program.
THINK about it. How do you have your taxes withheld(not "pay")? They're withheld from your pay check. Athlete's do not receive a pay check from a University.
Yes "employees" receive some benefits from companies they work for. Athletes are not employees, they do not work for Universities.
Universities and the IRS would guffaw at your thoughts.
I'm not "speculating". I know what I'm talking about. I have no idea what you're talking about.
|
|
|
Post by heresjim on Oct 7, 2019 12:41:48 GMT -5
Jim, once again you are clueless. Give us ONE example of ANY entity in the country that does not pay an individual yet that person is in their pension program. THINK about it. How do you have your taxes withheld(not "pay")? They're withheld from your pay check. Athlete's do not receive a pay check from a University. Yes "employees" receive some benefits from companies they work for. Athletes are not employees, they do not work for Universities. Universities and the IRS would guffaw at your thoughts. I'm not "speculating". I know what I'm talking about. I have no idea what you're talking about. You are inferring about what I'm talking about, instead of asking for clarification. I think universities will eventually pay their athletes and thus, treat them like "real employees". That's why I used the term because I know you know what it means (pay into a pension, pay taxes, whatever infers all the things that go with being an employee). It's possible to discuss this in good faith lol, this isn't a debate stage with our honor on the line.
|
|
|
Post by cbus on Oct 7, 2019 15:17:13 GMT -5
So what is going to stop an OSU fan from getting an autograph from Justin Fields and paying him $50K? Or better yet promising to do that with Justin while he's still at Georgia or while he's still in High School (if he transfers to OSU). I think the colleges are worried about this because that same donor might decrease his contribution to the University by the $50K he gave to Justin. The most talented team will be the one with the most wealthy fans. I don't think anyone wants that. Or am I missing something?
|
|
|
Post by sportsjock on Oct 7, 2019 15:35:20 GMT -5
So what is going to stop an OSU fan from getting an autograph from Justin Fields and paying him $50K? Or better yet promising to do that with Justin while he's still at Georgia or while he's still in High School (if he transfers to OSU). I think the colleges are worried about this because that same donor might decrease his contribution to the University by the $50K he gave to Justin. The most talented team will be the one with the most wealthy fans. I don't think anyone wants that. Or am I missing something? Why waste a minute of time on a garbage, hypothetical topic that has zero chance of ever coming to being. No doubt there are idiots and forces out there, bent on dismantling and destroying college sports and amateur sports in America. Not gonna happen. Let's move on.....
|
|
|
Post by Willard Fillmore on Oct 7, 2019 15:46:48 GMT -5
Jim, once again you are clueless. Give us ONE example of ANY entity in the country that does not pay an individual yet that person is in their pension program. THINK about it. How do you have your taxes withheld(not "pay")? They're withheld from your pay check. Athlete's do not receive a pay check from a University. Yes "employees" receive some benefits from companies they work for. Athletes are not employees, they do not work for Universities. Universities and the IRS would guffaw at your thoughts. I'm not "speculating". I know what I'm talking about. I have no idea what you're talking about. You are inferring about what I'm talking about, instead of asking for clarification. I think universities will eventually pay their athletes and thus, treat them like "real employees". That's why I used the term because I know you know what it means (pay into a pension, pay taxes, whatever infers all the things that go with being an employee). It's possible to discuss this in good faith lol, this isn't a debate stage with our honor on the line. You're right, you can say anything you want on, even it only has a one in billion chance of happening. But such a practice can make one look bad. Why must one ask for clarification? Shouldn't you mean what you say the first time? Or are you making this up as you go? You're talking silliness. If athletes are going to be paid by Universities JUST to play a sport. Then they can be fired after the first game or for that matter before the season starts if their boss(coach) doesn't like the way they're preforming their "job". "Employees" can leave a job at any time they want for a different job. "Employees" can go on strike. I've never heard of an "employer" that limits the length of employment for their employees to a maximum of 5 years. OR are college athletes going to now play for 20 years? I was on a debate team in college, you better watch out. lolz
|
|
|
Post by heresjim on Oct 7, 2019 18:53:23 GMT -5
You are inferring about what I'm talking about, instead of asking for clarification. I think universities will eventually pay their athletes and thus, treat them like "real employees". That's why I used the term because I know you know what it means (pay into a pension, pay taxes, whatever infers all the things that go with being an employee). It's possible to discuss this in good faith lol, this isn't a debate stage with our honor on the line. You're right, you can say anything you want on, even it only has a one in billion chance of happening. But such a practice can make one look bad. Why must one ask for clarification? Shouldn't you mean what you say the first time? Or are you making this up as you go? You're talking silliness. If athletes are going to be paid by Universities JUST to play a sport. Then they can be fired after the first game or for that matter before the season starts if their boss(coach) doesn't like the way they're preforming their "job". "Employees" can leave a job at any time they want for a different job. "Employees" can go on strike. I've never heard of an "employer" that limits the length of employment for their employees to a maximum of 5 years. OR are college athletes going to now play for 20 years? I was on a debate team in college, you better watch out. lolz The nature of the English language is one grounded in subjectivity and impreciseness. When any Supreme Court case is brought up, no argument that is made avoids questions of clarification from the justices. Not to mention that many of the people making those arguments are the best in the country. It's part of life lol. I think colleges/universities should be able to fire and hire athletes at will. Those players can go on strike, they can play for as long as the schools will let them, ect... I also think collegiate athletics will die long term, if we are being honest. And I think it's for the better of those kids anyways. I also debated in college, and it's not a useful approach when communicating ideas with people lol. In debate, people try to twist the meaning of other peoples words to undermine their argument, infer things that were not intended, and avoid any attempt in reaching a consensus (whether they agree on what the base assumptions are being made, or whether the facts have made only one side viable). This is a discussion with strangers and no stakes (unless you really value internet points). The only thing of value we can really get out of this is an understanding of each other's viewpoints (so we better empathize with other mindsets), and a more refined approach when talking about these subjects in real life.
|
|