Carey Booth enters transfer portal.
- Thread starter PSUWrestlingFanSince2011
- Start date
I never supported the idea that football players should get automatic passing grades. Just the opposite! I've always said that college sports should be played by college students. Why do you accuse me of that?
I totally disagree that players are being exploited. There's no doubt that players work hard but they do so willingly. That why families often spend $80k/yr to send their kids to places like IMG academy. To be educated and to develop their athletic talent. If their was no college football families who could afford to do so would spend money to get their kids trained for the next level.
Serious question. Do you think that women's field hockey players are being exploited? If so why do you think they tolerate such abuse? It seems to me that the only difference is that football makes a big profit and the players receive much greater perks.
I didn't accuse you of anything.
Doing something willingly doesn't mean you're not being exploited. I think you just don't understand what the term "exploited" means. Yes, IMG also exploits people who, due to their irrational hopes and dreams, are happily exploited. "Take my money so lil Billy might one day become the next big thing!"
If those field hockey players are being used to allow you (the royal "you") to benefit while reducing their ability to get a proper education than, yes ... they're being exploited. "Fortunately," there isn't nearly as much money and advantage to be had from women's field hockey, so the levels of exploitation are inherently limited. Unfortunately, in college football, that historically has not been the case. But now the playing fields are evening somewhat (notice I said "somewhat" as it's still too uneven, uncertain and inconsistent).
This isn't a difficult concept.
Let's take one specific issue ... college football players' names/likenesses being used in video games ... there was a time when someone produced a video game that made these producers millions upon millions upon millions of dollars, and it used college football players' names/likenesses to do so. College football players received no direct monetary benefit from this, but someone else made mucho dinero off of it.
However, someone could claim ... much as you claim that the training (and swag, and fake education) they receive makes it all worth it ... that the fame the kids got, or the joy of playing a video game with their own likeness in it ... is a value that they obtained. Therefore, they're not being exploited in that instance.
I, on the other hand, would claim that these folks are ignorant ... that there is a value to someone's name/likeness being used to promote some product (here, a video game), and that these people are being exploited when they're not obtaining that market value in exchange for the use of their name/likeness.
So, whether you play college football with the hope that you'll obtain a quality education you otherwise wouldn't obtain in the process, or you play college football with the hope that you'll become a pro athlete and make millions ... or any of a number of other rationalizations for pursuing participation in college football ... many parties have been exploiting these dreams and desires, and not providing kids the full value of their contributions to these parties' financial fortunes.
Last edited:
Exploitation taken to the literal definition means all college athletes are being exploited if there is one person enjoying what they do (benefitting). I assume they charge to watch a women's field hockey game well there you go that is exploitation. More pronounced in college football.
You are looking at this too black and white assuming all high level basketball and football players are not really getting any kind of education. Maybe you are not making this absolute contention but you seem to be hinting that these high level athletes are getting a so called "Mickey Mouse" education. Yes, my words not yours. How do you know that? I would agree that they are athletes first and students second but that doesn't mean they take basket weaving and have someone else take all their classes. There is a big gray area. Take the Duke basketball program. I contend that none of those players would be admitted to the school if they were not an elite high school basketball player. However that does not mean that their education at Duke becomes some sort of charade. The one and done guys probably are just slipping by or biding time but they are the exception. The football players at Penn State have to stay 3 years so there time is not completely devoid of any educational value.
I agree. As Lando likes to point out, the kids love it and we are no longer the target market, but I'm not convinced yet. I think fan interest is a lagging indicator. I don't think understanding of NIL coupled with the portal has fully manifested yet. I'm a strong believer that people enjoy amateurism and no one cares about the minor leagues. As college athletes act more as "professionals" I think interest wanes.
I think this is especially true if something like the "super league" that has been floated happens where conferences are gone and we have collective bargaining as employees. How is that not a professional minor league and why do I care about it?
FWIW, I think the case is stronger for the dissolution of major college basketball. Football has some systemic challenges due to the costs involved in running a team (facilities, numbers, equipment, health, etc are very high). Basketball on the other hand is very low cost and the infrastructure for a developmental system is already in place. Between the AAU and NBA G-league, it is not that dissimilar from the developmental systems we already have around the world for soccer and rugby. Quite literally, college basketball could go away tomorrow and the pipeline of players for the NBA wouldn't be impacted. It would only take some tweaking and potentially some expansion of the G-league or adding of a 2nd tier.
The football pipeline, on the other hand, would crumble. You could potentially imagine the UFL reformulated to offer a glimpse into the rising stars of tomorrow, instead of offering the guys not quite good enough for the NFL. 8 teams, however are not a sufficient feeder system for 32 NFL teams so it would likely take substantial investment/subsidizing by the NFL to expand the UFL and find a way to monetize it effectively to minimize losses or possibly break even.
An awful lot of people are exploited in your world. I guess I was too. I played sports in high school and college. I worked for private sector companies and while I made good money the company made even more so I was obviously exploited.
The college game is a much more exciting product compared to the NFL in my opinion.
Sigh.
I said this wasn't complicated. I spelled it out again. In detail. With examples. And you still aren't getting it.
Your last sentence is completely nonsensical and doesn't follow from what I've clearly described.
Now, maybe if these private sector companies simply put you up in temporary housing while you worked there, gave you food, trained you in your work, and maybe allowed you to go to college for free ... and gave you no salary for your efforts ... then you could say you were exploited. Was that the case?
And was there a whole system set up to entice you, as a child, to take that opportunity? And it's not the case that if someone above you makes more money than you do, that you're being exploited. That's just a ridiculous interpretation you put forth. You couldn't have gotten that from what I said, if you're being reasonable.
I played in college, too. I wasn't exploited.
Last edited:
In 1982? Yes. Now? No. In the future the way this is headed? No way.
This is incorrect. That is not the literal definition being used. The following 2 definitions are instructive: "use (a situation or person) in an unfair or selfish way." "benefit unfairly from the work of (someone), typically by overworking or underpaying them."
Resultantly, the entirety of the rest of your post is completely irrelevant and misguided.
So what athletes are exploited and which ones are not? All the ones you deem in your head that are underpaid or are used unfairly or selfishly to benefit others? And none of them get a "real" education?
I've already addressed, earlier in the thread, all the points you've attempted to bring up here. Now you're just trying to be argumentative.
Wow! Was this thread ever hijacked.
I was hoping for an update on Booth and found nothing.
