+1 for the blazing saddles reference
"And yes, much like college football players, those kids should see a slice of the broadcast money."
Can we please stop with this "everyone who shows up on tv for 35 seconds deserves a royalty" nonsence all ready...
How about Wright State once every 15-20 years?
This is precisely the point, though. They never could have expected Manziel to fall as far as he did, and decided on Gilbert over Manziel at 8. I think the logical conclusion is that Manziel certainly wasn't valued as the #1 guy on the board, and likely wasn't even valued as the #1 qb by the browns.
There were no light bulbs on the Wright Flyer.
Edison was good, but he is given way too much credit over some of his contemporaries.
Would it not be considered a qualified tuition reduction, as for any other employee who goes (or whos kids) go for free?
Been a while since I studied tax, but I don't think this practically changes anything. It was income (in the broad sense) before and still would be now. There are just exceptions/rules for how it is treated.
Having just skimmed the NLRB ruling, it appears to only apply to football players. It also doesn't appear that the criteria used in the decision would lead every athlete to being included as an employee, although that's just based on a cursory review. Moreover, I would assume all eligible athletes would have to be together, but perhaps they could be separated by sport with their own CBAs.
UV 'cause I'm not sure why you got a DV...
At any rate, I'm one of those fans you speak of (being from Dayton, of course). I can't say as though I've seen any similarly situated fans trolling OSU because they are also OSU fans. Honestly, I think it's the people who aren't really sports fans and hate hearing about it that are doing the trolling, or are the die-hard UC folks you speak of who would troll anything anti-OSU, not just UD beating OSU. Dayton has some strong basketball pride and it's nice to see them finally making something of it again. For me, the first round game was a win-win. I took it as it was and have moved on, strongly pulling for UD to go the distance. Had OSU won, I'd be doing the same thing for them.
If you're referring to the DDN, then that has nothing to do with the school or the team. Would you like OSU to be held accountable for everything the Dispatch says?
You seriously don't think there will be any fallout from this on other varsity sports at any school across the country? Or is it that you just don't care about those smaller sports and smaller school?
I lean towards DJ on this one. I am hell bent on the LAW.
This is certainly noble and proper, however, I feel that many people see this issue as being about the end goal. I'm certainly not speaking of you , but I feel that to many, the particular law is a means to an end and the end is the most important part. In this case, the lawsuit to many isn't about protecting the market and antitrust laws, it's about destroying the NCAA and seeing players paid (rightfully or not). Unfortunately, the law is often abused in this way.
It's a shame that Kettering is a #12 seed, andeven so, it's a shame that he is valued less than Les Wexner.
Did you say David Klingler and Dave Shula?
Sort of surprised nobody has mentioned Daytona or Indy yet. Neither would be #1, but I look forward to both quite a bit.
Understandably, the previous rule was a problem. BUT, I still have problems the review of penalties in any sense. Either have a strict targeting penalty or don't. Any review undermines the integrity of the penalty.
These numbers are why I'm in favor of college athletes being able to profit off their own image and also getting their slice of the billions of dollars in TV money being rained down on the sport. (For example, a 2010 Alabama player would have made $47,330 from live TV alone.)
4 years of that plus that 4 years in the NFL is still not enough to live on for the rest of your life. Except then, everyone is paying even less attention in school because they're already getting money. I don't see how those numbers support paying student-athletes. If anything, they support imposing more stringent standards.
It is, you're right. But I think it also goes a lot deeper than that. They have the money to build a stadium and there's room in Ohio City, but then it brings up issues of parking and the homeowners in the area. My feelings have always been that if they wanted to play on Friday nights, they could make it happen.
As others have said, Friday is for HS.
The converse also bugs me... that is, HS that play on Saturdays. I think this is big in Texas, and with some Catholic schools in Ohio. Ignatius does it in Cleveland and it drives me nuts.
I think it was a joke about the Halloween parties in Athens.
I was in that corner of the endzone just a few rows up and saw the whole thing. It was one of those "did that, was, no...." moments. I wasn't convinced until I got home after the game and looked it up.
Because that gives him better insight on the legal issues?
It's whether those young adults are being treated fairly in a multibillion-dollar industry essentially controlled by the NCAA, athletic directors, commissioners and TV executives.
This isn't the question either. The issue is of law, not economics and finance. I have no idea why Dodd chose to interview a finance professor other to make it appear that someone credible was backing his position.