Spielman and Hooley. Intellectually Dishonest, or Just Not Very Intelligent?

Show All Comments

buckeyeupnorth's picture

Can you at least link to an interview, or post or whatever you are referencing?

HS
buckeyeguy0615's picture

He probably heard it on the radio driving his car to work. Maybe?

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

He stated he listened to their conversation, and it's a radio show, so that's the conclusion I draw. 

HS
avail31678's picture

Then he should at least memorize every word and transcript it here....smh.

HS
Homey1970's picture

Most smartphones make this great idea possible.

HS
ChicagoBuckeye10's picture

Let me first say that I have nothing against them personally.

...probably should have used a more clear (and relevant) title then. 

HS
Steps1110's picture

They made valid points.  I don't understand why you have a problem with this.

Steps

HS
CincyBuck's picture

^ This.  Both points seem reasonable to me.  Though it's fair to disagree with them.

Sure, valuation isn't the same as annual profit.  I didn't listen to the show, so I can't attest to whether they adequately recognized this difference.  So what?  From what I've heard, OSU generates, like, $300M in revenue from the football team?  That's way more money than is being passed-on to the players.  I'm not sure that's subject to reasonable dispute.

And expanding the Playoff likely would dilute the regular season a bit.  This season, the SEC Championship Game probably wouldn't have mattered.  The same might be true with respect to the OSU/Michigan Game. 

None of that means it's unreasonable to disagree with them.  But calling someone "dishonest" for having an opinion that's based on concrete facts is a bit disingenuous. 

HS
ANOTHERMICHIGANLOSS's picture

Your $300M number...do you know what revenue means?  That's money coming in before expenses going out.  Think about the amount of money it takes to put on 1 single football game, and the insurance costs for housing 100K people for 4-5 hours.  If you make $80k per year, but you spend $79,300 after taking out your taxes and everything else you live on for the year, you are left with $700 in your bank account.  Businesses run the same way, if it makes it easier replace "revenue" with "income".  

Also I agree with the OP....colleges are already paying the student athletes, they should not pay them more.  Now as far as equipment deals and using their names to sell things, that's a totally different discussion and has less to do with OSU and more to do with sponsors and providers of OSU, and what the NCAA deems is ok to allow.  That's a side conversation that I would support different rules.  The way I see it is they should get paid for that, as it's just like you or I working a side job.

HS
bd2999's picture

Why do you need to be so combative with all of that.

I am pretty sure that OSU is not running a deficit on the football program. Nobody here has given a full on number for everything. But, when one considers TV revenue, ticket sales, licensing and so on and so forth, the revenue is a big number. And given the demand on those things, the revenue is high.

Even accounting for things like having a football game and all of those expenses, it is hard to believe they are not making quite a bit of money. And one could make the case that the money a college athlete is getting is not representative of the value they give to the University football program.

We would need better numbers to make a case either way, but saying they get their tuition and a bit of money and then having a comment like they are not turning much profit in the end is mind boggling. If they were any other sort of employee, and the best programs have guys going pro, than the school is making more on the kid than vice versa. It is all about money now,.

HS
stxbuck's picture

He isn't being combative, he's just crunching the numbers. The whole point of any financial enterprise is to generate a greater profit per employee/participant than is paid out in salary/benefits/training/whatever. Also, if Spielman-or you-or anyone else is going to cry for the poor exploited football players, I hope they are willing to admit that they COMPLETELY endorse telling all the women's sports (except for some hoops programs) and the non-revenue men's sports to completely go pound sand, b/c the income produced by men's football and basketball supports the scholarships and training costs of hundreds of other athletes at every school. If Johnny LB starts getting a salary, guess whose scholly/program disappears-that's right-Ronnie the wrestler and Tamika the sprinter.

HS
ANOTHERMICHIGANLOSS's picture

Bingo, people just see a big number and assume there is a building full of money sitting somewhere.  There are a ton of examples where a company has $300M in revenue but lose money every year (in no way am I saying this is the case of OSU).  Revenue is a fake number for a business.  Would you rather have $300M in revenue with $350M in expenses or have $1M in revenue and $800K in expenses?

HS
bucklox's picture

Give me the $300M...i'll just welch on the $350M in expenses and disappear.  

HS
JCam061588's picture

I am perfectly ok with that. You don’t exploit one group to cover for another, you develop a system that fairly compensates those based on what they contribute. Exploitation is exploitation, the driving force of a billion dollar industry should not be the least compensated, add to that the fact that they are the least protected & most restricted. 

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
RubixTube's picture

not to mention, they are choosing to participate in something that is 100% voluntary for them.

This is the point that is so often overlooked.  If the athletes truly feel as though they're being exploited, is not the simple solution to remove themselves from the equation?  

Never before in the history of man have lives less lived been more chronicled. - Dennis Miller

HS
JCam061588's picture

How could they? The NCAA has virtually monopolized amateur sports in this country.

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
RubixTube's picture

The NAIA still exists, does it not?  

Never before in the history of man have lives less lived been more chronicled. - Dennis Miller

HS
Ryder's picture

Not unless you have another way that a player has a legitimate way to make it to the NFL.

HS
RubixTube's picture

So then, in addition to education, room & board, meals, trainers tables and access to the best coaching available, they're also working towards a lucrative post-grad career?  Well, couldn't they just be considered interns? 

Never before in the history of man have lives less lived been more chronicled. - Dennis Miller

HS
ANOTHERMICHIGANLOSS's picture

As Stxbuck said, I'm not being combative.  Also I was not trying to spark that sort of view on my post.  Maybe it's the old tone problem with typing versus speaking.  I was asking a serious question.  To think that a program with $300M in revenue isn't spending most of that is reaching.  As Stxbuck said, again, not only do they have straight up expenses directly related to football, they pay for Jim and Jan's daughter from Coshocton to be on a full ride scholarship playing field hockey.  

Agreed about needing better numbers.  But saying the only thing the student gets is "tuition and a bit of money" isn't helping us get any closer to the real numbers.  You are missing the fact that they house and feed the students, which in and of itself is a bigger number than tuition and a bit of money.  Whether people want to admit it or not, between the education, housing, and extra expenses every football player receives, they are truly probably making more money per year than the average working adult in Ohio.  Now as far as the money they bring into OSU versus what they are getting?  Again, more numbers needed.  Because while Nick Bosa might be raking it in for them, Joe Recruitbust that was a 5* coming in didn't ever see the field because he got in trouble or didn't pan out, and brought in $0, so you are also playing with that scale.  

Truth is, you or I or anyone else can't even begin to make sweeping generalizations about what should or shouldn't happen as far as athlete pay because in reality, all we see is that big inflated number attached to the schools name so people can overreact about how much money they are raking in without knowing what is actually going back out.

HS
CincyBuck's picture

Your $300M number...do you know what revenue means?

I do.  I worked in accounting for several years.  So I probably know what "revenue" means more than the vast majority of individuals who peruse this website.  Though your condescending tone and attempt to compare the Ohio State Football Program's financial condition -- on a cash basis, apparently -- to somebody's bank account are duly noted.  I probably would've went with a lemonade stand, myself. 

The minute I have audited financials for the football program -- which I'm not even sure exist, since there's a good chance they're consolidated with other entities, programs, etc., and it wouldn't exactly be "good PR" to demonstrate exactly how much money you make off the work of "scholar athletes" -- I'll be sure to share them.  I have heard that the football program is allocated a large number from that revenue to do pretty much whatever it wants no questions asked.  I'd also ask exactly who (i.e., what entity, foundation, institution, person, etc.) pays several of the expenses associated with holding a game, running a program, etc.  And depending on how the entity(ies) are structured, I suspect there'd be a fair amount of non-cash expense accruals that eat into the revenue figure, leading to a...  misleading portrayal of what funds are actually being generated. 

For the time being, I think the fact that a football program composed of scholar athletes -- who are not allowed to have jobs, profit from their own personas, enter the NFL, etc. due to various rules, regulations, and laws -- generates revenues even close to that number is more than enough evidence to reasonably form the relevant opinions (i.e., that it's unfair to the scholar athletes).  It's fair to disagree that athletes should be paid.  But let's not pretend we're dealing with a razor-thin margin, here.

HS
ANOTHERMICHIGANLOSS's picture

First off, I apologize if my reply came off as condescending.  See a reply to someone else, that was not my intent.  Typing tone and verbal tone are 2 totally different things.  Had you been in front of me when I said what I typed, you wouldn't have taken it that way.  I legitimately asked the question because if you asked most people they wouldn't be able to tell you the difference between revenue and profit (I work with financials and that is based off of my 15 years of experience).  The references to a personal bank account was to simplify not confuse.  Money is money.

The numbers you are seeking pretty much don't exist haha.  I've tried to find them before just out of curiosity.  The problem is nobody knows the numbers.  There is so much coming in and going out.  Think about how many people are employed by the football program directly or indirectly alone.  

As far as the student athletes go...I think there is one major thing that is being overlooked.  Let's break it down into students vs student athletes.  Students pay insane money to attend college in hopes of getting a job.  Student athletes don't incur this cost and have their 4 years of room and board covered in hopes of getting a job.  They do the extra work so they are compensated (maybe not fairly in some eyes).  But they are compensated.  If you don't think they are give one of their parents a ring and ask them how it is having their son living for free away from home and being fed....it's real.  Both students and student athletes go in with a goal, to come out and have a job.  The pie in the sky is just a lot bigger for the top end football talent.

Either way, we aren't going to have the same opinion which is fine, but my bad if you thought I was being condescending.  Not my intent at all.

HS
CincyBuck's picture

First off, I apologize if my reply came off as condescending.

No worries.  And my apologies for inferring as much.  Communicating through text can lead to misunderstandings a lot easier than conversation. 

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

+1 to both of you for the exchange. Respect the respect. 

HS
MJTampa's picture

And expanding the Playoff likely would dilute the regular season a bit.  This season, the SEC Championship Game probably wouldn't have mattered.  The same might be true with respect to the OSU/Michigan Game. 

OK...but that definitely cuts both ways. This year, the PAC12 title game meant nothing...it would've meant something if conference champs get in. And that goes for every conference championship game where the winner didn't get in, including ours this year. Not to mention last year's SEC title game, which apparently didn't matter because even the loser still got in. From a personal standpoint, I would find the conference championship games in all 5 conferences much more watchable if I knew the winner was getting an automatic bid. It would even make regular-season games more important and interesting to watch, because you'd be very interested in other teams' games in your conference if those games affected Ohio State's ability to win the Big Ten East and have a shot at an auto bid to the playoff. I think 8 teams is perfect, because it solves both sides of the issue...it allows 5 teams (the conference champs) to earn their way in based on results on the field of play, as sports should be, and it also leaves a little wiggle room for great teams that stumbled once but are obviously great (like Bama last year or 2015 OSU), or aren't in one of the 5 conferences (like UCF and ND now, or Boise in previous years).

HS
CincyBuck's picture

A fair point, MJ.  And I don't disagree. 

But they (the commentators) are also right that, in many instances, an 8-team playoff would make games meaningless apart from seeding.  Which was my point.  Calling them "intellectually dishonest" (or whatever) for pointing-out something that is, perhaps indisputably, correct is a bit ridiculous.

HS
OSU_JD's picture

So, given that the Championship games are not going away, and I think we want them to matter...

Why not make it "win and you're win" with respect to P5 Conference Championship games?

I do not understand the argument (not saying you are making it) that we cannot have automatic bids. Why not?  That's how it works in professional sports - win your division and you get to go to the playoffs.  The three remaining spots can be called "Wild Cards", just like we do in all (American) professional sports.

HS
CincyBuck's picture

This is what I'd like to see.  The less subjective, the better.  That's how it works in pretty much every other sport on Planet Earth.

The most common beef seems to be it might lead to a team pulling an upset in the Conference CG, then getting smoked in the Playoffs.  My response: so what?  Did anyone just watch those beat downs between the allegedly best 4 teams?  Also, I feel like it's common for an 8-8/9-6 NFL team to go on a tear in the Playoffs.

HS
OSU_JD's picture

exactly. everyone thought all year Alabama was this unstoppable juggernaut and Clemson made it looks easy.  it's possible that Ohio State might have had Saban's number too.  and everyone roots for underdogs in places like the NCAA tournament, so why not get some Cinderella stories in there?  maybe Northwestern upsets OSU and Northwestern gets a shot at say, playing UCF, in this hypothetical tournament.  Who wouldn't cheer for that?  I would be rooting for Northwestern in the scenario. 

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

I don't think likening college athletes to slave labor is a valid point. It clearly demonstrates a disregard for, or lack of understanding as to what actually constitutes slave labor, all in an effort to make a point. 

Just my opinion. 

HS
avail31678's picture

Agree - downplays what actual slavery is.  It's like comparing someone to Hitler or a Nazi.  Misplaced exaggeration, IMHO.  

HS
stxbuck's picture

And the OP has equally valid counter-arguments. As I have said in other threads, the monetary value of football players to the university is similar to that of grad students in the sciences/engineering. I have an in-law who obtained a Ph.D in microbiology, and was paid 35K a year to be a teaching/research assistant. He developed several patents while working in his Ph.D program, the majority of the royalties of which didn't go to him-they went to the university/university department/faculty advisor. He now has a 6 figure job based on his Ph.D training-just like Spielman had when he finished his 'training" in football at tOSU.

HS
LCT's picture

Spielman's the man.
Hooley's..... a man

Lifetime vs. UM: L 8-1, C 7-0, T 4-0

HS
Nutinpa's picture

Loves

Chris's

Takes on things

HS
stxbuck's picture

Do you agree w/ Spiels take in this case?

HS
LCT's picture

I do not agree with paying college athletes.

I do not agree with expanding the playoff field to 8.

Lifetime vs. UM: L 8-1, C 7-0, T 4-0

HS
stxbuck's picture

Agree on both counts, tOSU's OL/run game incompetence against Purdue shouldn't be a justification for blowing up the entire apple cart.

HS
bucklox's picture

Limited 

Capacity

Tournament

HS
BuckeyeInOrlando's picture

This year, having 8 teams wouldn't have mattered (we had 2 teams that were clearly the best)

False. (Yep. Clemson and Ohio State.)

HS
CincyBuck's picture

Also, it's impressive how many times the following scenario plays out, yet everybody remains none the wiser: x team is unbeatable; y team beats x; ipso factor, y team is unbeatable.  Neither team played against team z.

This year, 'Bama was historically good, unbeatable, etc. two weeks ago.  Then ESPN shifted its narrative so that people would watch the game -- i.e., Clemson-'Bama would be a historic matchup.  Now it's "indisputable" that Clemson is the best team.

HS
avail31678's picture

Yeh I'm starting to sniff the self-fulfilling prophecy here.  No doubt Bama and Clemson have been excellent, but if they keep playing each OTHER for the most part, and don't play, as you say, Team Z, do we really know they're the two very best EVERY single year?  

No doubt Bama and Clemson probably are the two best teams, at least in recent years, but when Bama gets waxed like that and plays almost nobody last year or this year, how can we say they are just the best each year?  Based off recruiting classes (which are always top notch)?  Because "eye test?"

HS
Cincybuckeye's picture

After all the games played out? Sure, you can make a case that we're in the top two considering that we won the Rose Bowl. But, beforehand, before all the game were played, you can't honestly say that we looked better than either Bama or Clemson. 

HS
BuckeyeInOrlando's picture

I'm disputing the OP's claim that 8 teams wouldn't have mattered this year.

Before Monday night, nobody thought Clemson was anything special, and many people would have probably picked Ohio State to beat Clemson on a neutral field.

HS
Nutinpa's picture

Before Monday night, nobody thought Clemson was anything special, and many people would have probably picked Ohio State to beat Clemson on a neutral field.

Eh...not so sure about that.  Some people may have, but they would have been in the minority.

HS
Pahimar's picture

Also, a lack of parity in college football isn't an argument to keep the playoff field small so that it can remain the sole purview of the elite schools who have both the football machines and the reputations to get there year after year. Something like 14 or 15 of the 20 slots in the CFP so far have been taken up by teams with repeat appearances (Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma, Ohio State if memory serves). 

Lack of parity isn't an argument for maintaining a system that makes it harder for other teams to do the things needed to attain parity. I hate to say this as an OSU fan since it is mostly to our advantage, but if we are maintaining a 4 team playoff because we think it is likely that year after year the same 1-2 teams will beat the ever living daylights out of any team they play, then we need to start looking at how to reduce things like oversigning and having entire shadow coaching staffs as "quality control."

HS
colo_buckeye's picture

I still wanted to see a Day offense and Haskins have a shot, oh well.  Not sure about the exploiting part of collegiate athletes, I would agree with your assessments.  

Watching or listening to any media opinions nowadays can be a drag, but here's a FACT:  ttun still sucks!

Go Bucks!

Beat ttun!

Beat the NCAA transfer waiver? (Wasn't quite sure how to word it, hope it goes through by Feb as stated in the skully)

God > Family > Buckeyes football

HS
Dstacify's picture

I don't think Spielman's unintelligent at all but doesn't he also have beef with the University atm? IIRC he just settled a lawsuit with them recently.

11 Strong.

HS
RK84's picture

I wouldn't say beef as much as he believes the players should be adequately compensated for what they provide to the university.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Dstacify's picture

Well if the University did that they'd be flirting with NCAA violations again. So I'd say their hands are kind of tied there. Unless Spielman is specifically referring to former players only.

11 Strong.

HS
RK84's picture

I think he is on two points. One, being former players likeness which is the settlement he recently won and believe donated back. Two, that current players should be compensated above their scholarship.

Nothing that would raise the eyebrow at the NCAA offices.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Dstacify's picture

I'm pretty sure current players being compensated at all by the University would get the NCAA all bent out of shape no matter what. Remember they hammered DeVier Posey for nearly an entire season just because they didn't like the salary he was making at a summer job. The NCAA is very anal about player compensation because it's well within their realm of jurisdiction (unlike if a football program gets hit with criminal activity like at PSU, when it then becomes a law enforcement matter instead of an NCAA matter).

11 Strong.

HS
RK84's picture

he isn't saying current players are. He is saying players should be.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Dstacify's picture

I know what he's saying. What I'm saying is he's fighting a lost cause on that front by feuding with the University over that. The University is not the source of the problem regarding player compensation, the NCAA is. So instead of fighting the good fight for these players he's coming across as disrespectful to his alma mater instead. The University has no power to change the rules on CFB players receiving compensation. That has to come from the NCAA (I'm sure Spielman is smart enough to know that).

11 Strong.

HS
RK84's picture

but he's not fighting with the university over that. He's not fighting with the University at all. He filed a justified lawsuit, that was settled based on the university using players images for paid advertising.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Fatpants's picture

Spielman has a righteous beef. He's a former player that's still very much involved in the game. Nobody can say his position is misinformed.

PG <3 PG

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

If he actually likened a football player at Ohio State to a child enslaved for labor, then I will proudly state that his position is absolutely misinformed. 

It's not only misinformed, it's fucking ignorant. 

HS
RK84's picture

Agree with both points.

Yes, I think they should be paid. No they are nowhere close to slaves.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
RK84's picture

My opinion is that players should get something in the form of compensation for what they provide to the school. Paid would open a can of worms and amateurism would be at stake, even though we know there is nothing amateur about Buckeye football.

So yes to both but carefully worded and carried out?

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

Are free tuition, room and board, meals (and not the shift they give “normal” students), books, tutoring, clothes, and health care (among many other things) not considered compensation?  

HS
RK84's picture

Not in my book, that's all part of an earned scholarship. Compensation would be anything on top of that, by recognizing you are part of an entity that brings in such a great amount of revenue that your program is privately funded. That revenue is in part created by your contributions.

But thing is 3M, I used to play, so my opinion on what players should get is obviously skewed.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

I know you did, and I think your opinion is valid. 

My daughter is a walk-on, so I look at the benefits she gets as a form of compensation. It is enabling her to get an education cheaper than she was as a normal student. So, as her percentage of scholarship money goes up, the more I think they're compensating her for her efforts. Very few non-revenue athletes get a full ride. 

I look at this as it pertains to all student athletes, and not just high profile football players. 

HS
RK84's picture

Totally see where you're coming from. It makes sense and I think we are probably two sides of the same coin. Just varies on your definition of compensation. Normal students don't get to walk into an office, sign a few papers and have everything handed to them, including books, meal plan, etc, then basically get a personalized diet plan and clothing. So from that perspective definite compensation, but to an athlete its just all included.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

And, her swag was impressive. Of course, it's all purple, so... 

HS
Pahimar's picture

Setting aside the way even profiting of likeness would totally transform recruiting in a way that definitely doesn't promote parity, the tricky thing with the current setup is that the cash value of most NCAA players (non-cash) compensation (i.e., tuition, room and board, training, healthcare, etc...) is FAR in excess of what their skills would be worth in any sort of imaginable open market, even in the revenue sports. As evidence we can look at the compensation of A and AA baseball players. However, there is a small handful of players concentrated at a handful of schools who are WAY undercompensated and they are also restricted from profiting of their likeness AND advancing to the level where they can get paid. Then you throw in the fact that their "value" is often dramatically enhanced by where they are playing. How much is Tua Tagovailoa's likeness worth if he is tearing up the MAC at Bowling Green instead of Alabama?

It sucks, and personally I'm open to the idea of allowing players to profit off their likenesses, but I think it is important to recognize than in some ways NCAA setup is a form of socialism where the many players benefit off the backs of the few. Even the money that schools like OSU extract from their revenue sports go to the maintenance of the machine, non-revenue sports, or to benefit the university (and therefore other students athlete and non-athlete alike). The only place that large sums of money are being extracted for personal profits are the large coaching and AD salaries.

HS
Homey1970's picture

Right or wrong, the use of exaggerations has and will always be used to make a point.

- signed, slave to this site

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

He is free to be as ineffective as he likes, in his chosen hyperbole.

You called yourself a slave to the site, you didn't say Priestas enslaved you for his own personal gain. That's how I interpret Spielman's remarks, as outlined above. 

HS
QuadCitiesBuckeye's picture

You called yourself a slave to the site, you didn't say Priestas enslaved you for his own personal gain.

Maybe not Priestas, but the MODs are certainly benefiting from our enslavement when they steal our hard earned helmet stickers

Shandy is not beer

HS
Dstacify's picture

I think his player compensation beef with the University is misplaced tbh. Literally what he's complaining about is out of the University's hands and should be taken up with the NCAA. The University is required to abide by NCAA standards after all.

11 Strong.

HS
RK84's picture

The player compensation beef - was with the way the university was using former players likeness with advertisers without compensating them. Thus the settlement.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Fatpants's picture

How much you think Les and Troy got for selling Hondas with these banners?

 

PG <3 PG

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

Take Honda off of the bottom, and I think that's fine. 

Put Honda somewhere else. Hell, let them sponsor first downs, like Case IH does at Kansas State. 

HS
Fatpants's picture

If you take the Honda off, it’s an entirely different animal. 

Anyone that’s listened to a Buckeye game on the radio knows what a Poet Bioprocessing first down and a Big Sandy Superstore Big Play third down is. Poor Paul. I hope he gets paid extra every time he has to say that. 

PG <3 PG

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

My reference was to the public address announcer. He tells the folks in attendance that “this first down is sponsored by Case IH...”

HS
Fatpants's picture

If there's one thing I respect about Michigan, it's that not everything is covered by ads. I love listening to games on the radio, especially AM. Changing leaves, clambakes, Buckeyes on the AM. That's autumn in Ohio. Now all you hear is Poet Bioprocessing and Big Sandy Superstore. Enough already. I'm waiting for the NCAA to let them put ads on uniforms so they can look like soccer unis.

That's all. Off my lawn. All of you.

PG <3 PG

HS
logamaniac's picture

Honest question, if the “slavery” angle is an issue (as it should be) would you be ok with “indentured servitude”?

still illegal I believe. 

HS
Milk Steak To Go's picture

Except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.

HS
Homey1970's picture

Didn’t know Les was a Honda man.  

HS
Dstacify's picture

That was the what the lawsuit was about and I support Spielman on that argument. I don't support him on fighting the University for current player compensation though. The NCAA makes those rules and OSU is required to either follow them or face sanctions as an alternative. He's unnecessarily barking up the wrong tree there.

11 Strong.

HS
Fatpants's picture

But, it's the big programs that need to fight that fight with the NCAA. He's trying to get them to fight it.

PG <3 PG

HS
stxbuck's picture

Righteous anger (in some people's minds, not mine in this case) and fiscal realities are two very different things.

HS
Jdadams01's picture

he believes the players should be adequately compensated for what they provide to the university.

This is the part that's always a hang up for me. People say that players should just be paid for the value they are bringing in, but who judges that? If you are truly paying them for their value, wouldn't that mean that not every player would be paid? Because obviously Brady Taylor was not as valuable to OSU as Dwayne Haskins. So at that point we are talking about only some players being paid and in varying amounts. If that happens, it's basically free-agency. Because if you then pay all the players equally, you will always have someone who is not making enough for their value. Fourth string LBs essentially have no value for the athletic department's revenue, but if you start paying them, don't you have to also pay the baseball team and the women's track team? They are bringing in as much value as that fourth string LB.

The poster above who stated that the football team's revenue is paying for the track team, the baseball team, the soccer team, etc. had it exactly right. If you divert that money to paying KJ Hill, where does the soccer team get its funding?

And the argument about how much money coaches make is not a good case for paying players. Urban Meyer brought real, measurable value to OSU. Not only to the athletic department, but to the university as a whole. His legacy at OSU will be far greater than any one player, just as Woody and Tress' are.

Where I think a change should be made is allowing the players to profit off of their likeness. That's something that can be measured. If Gatorade is willing to pay Haskins $100,000 to use his image on a bottle, he should be allowed to do that. That's a situation where the market can dictate what his likeness is worth and has no affect on any other athlete at OSU.

HS
RK84's picture

Agree with all of that, it becomes a tricky situation. Just let the players get their $$$ handshakes and free car leases, and let it go. Only being half sarcastic.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
osuflacco's picture

Feel like the equation isn't that hard...revenue generated from sport, less expenses for sport (schollies, coaches, facilities, etc.).  What is left is distributed in some fashion to players who generated said revenue on the field rather than given to other sports no one cares about to subsidize schollies for wrestling, water polo, gymnastics, swimming etc.  Each sport is a business unit...not football players literally paying for other kids to go to school for free.  

HS
Lifetime45's picture

Does the last guy on the bench get the same amount as Haskins?

HS
osuflacco's picture

Does one get a better scholarship than the other?  

HS
Milk Steak To Go's picture

That's what the current lawsuit against the NCAA and it's conferences is about.  Currently, the NCAA and the conferences set the value at scholarship plus cost of attendance.  But what if the schools and conferences were able to bid against each other for a player?  The market would set player value.

HS
Worthington Buck's picture

I think Hooley is in old man  "get off my lawn" territory.  I think the program took a real hit when Maddie left, she and Eric provided a young POV that did a good job of keeping Hooley tethered to reality.  Now that she's gone and when Speils isn't in, he tries to do his Cowherd impression and he's no where near as smart as Cowherd (who isn't as smart as he thinks).

It's still miles better than the dreck on ESPN radio in the morning.

And when "Munch" is in, it's unlistenable.  Guy does "July" topics the day after huge games.

HS
BuckeyeInOrlando's picture

I'd be willing to bet they also offer scholarships for big money sports.

I seriously doubt all of the best high school athletes come from families that can afford $80k/year tuition for high school.

HS
Netbuck's picture

I'm sure you're right. AFAIK IMG is also a huge sports marketing agency. It's to their benefit to establish relationships with top athletes early in their careers. There are probably a big enough pool of families that do shell out the 80K to cover their costs anyway. People are spending crazy amounts on youth/HS sports these days.

HS
stxbuck's picture

Yup, the wannabes/non no brainer superstars subsidize the scholarship future pros. I had a discussion with a current Buckeye player about the value of going to a place like IMG-a player in the same league had transferred there-and we agreed that it probably wasn't worth it-the IMG player signed w/ Northwestern-LB-but would likely have gotten offered by the Wildcats regardless.

HS
BUCKEYE3M's picture

You run of the mill catholic school in Ohio is running in the $14-20K range. So, I'd imagine elite academies and boarding schools are easily $80K+.

HS
Fatpants's picture

Half day Kindergarten at an above-average private school in the 216 is roughly $8K.

$80K for everything at a place like IMG sounds about right.

PG <3 PG

HS
0H-10's picture

Standard tuition for one year of boarding at IMG Academy is $68,500 plus a team sport competition and training gear fee that ranges from $3,750-$4,250 depending on the sport. A single semester costs $39,400.

Link to article Source.

o||||||o

HS
RK84's picture

So OSU makes tons of money - players should be paid.

Playoff scenario this year was less than ideal - needs to be fixed.

Whats so wrong with those opinions?

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
cricejr's picture

My take away: You know as much about the economic aspect of the worth of a university as they do. You REALLY don't want to see college athletes get anything monetary for all the worth they put in and sacrifices they make and like seeing colleges rake in all the cash. And if they get hurt, who cares, we're being entertained!  The comparison to the College Football Playoff to the NFL playoffs seem like a good idea to you even though they are nothing alike.

I bleed scarlet...literally

HS
buckeyeupnorth's picture

"You REALLY don't want to see college athletes get anything monetary for all the worth they put in and sacrifices they make and like seeing colleges rake in all the cash"

They get a frickin degree for free. They get fed, housed, trained, have trainers, top flight medical care, tutors, constant help with classes, courses of study, personal life, and for those gifted, they get top training and assistance to go to the professional level of the sport. They receive cost of living stipends. And when they graduate, which a large percentage of them do, they don't have student loans, and they have been given a tremendous amount of help moving on to their career outside of athletics. Remember real life Wednesdays for the football team? Urban has been tasked with doing the same type of thing for all the other programs.

I didn't have any athletic gifts when I attended OSU, so I PAID for all my classes, I worked throughout college including summers, breaks, etc. I finally bought an old relatives 20 year old vehicle when I was a senior, I lived in rat infested boarding houses off campus or in six person apartments, I rarely had time to use any of the campus recreational facilities that I additionally paid for, I paid for tickets to go sit at Ohio Stadium . I didn't have tutors, I paid for all my books(pre laptop computer days) , and when I graduated, I had to go on my own to send up resumes, interview, etc. to get a job at just above minimum wage to start.

I am so tired of hearing about the poor abused student athletes at major colleges and how they should be paid to be a student athlete. 

I also nominate the phrase, " they sacrifice their bodies for our entertainment" as one of the most overused, most vacuous meme that runs through college football chat boards today. It has to come from people who sit in a room somewhere , obsessed with playing gladiator video games.  People don't go to college football games to be "entertained" . Go to Vegas to a magic show if you want to be entertained. People go to college football games to support the players who VOLUNTARILY play the game. While wearing a uniform designating which school team they play for because they are a student there and is what they have in common with many of the people in the stands. And will be leaving the school with a degree in hand and job prospects because that is the end of their formal playing days.

HS
NorCal Buckeye's picture

"I lived in rat infested boarding houses off campus or in six person apartments"

Damn, no wonder you're soo salty.

HS
Fatpants's picture

Don't curse the rats. Get a rat stick.

 

PG <3 PG

HS
RK84's picture

Clearly a case of bird law.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
BeaverOhioBuckeye's picture

When I read this I thought oh boo-who you got to party in a rat infested house like EVERYONE ELSE ON CAMPUS lol

HS
buckeyeupnorth's picture

It's a true story. I was in Columbus last year for an event and had the opportunity to drive around campus and off campus. Most off campus housing now looks like the Sandals Resort accommodations compared to the run down turn of the century housing that surrounded campus when I was a student.  I'm happy to see it, just for the fire prevention aspect alone. Getting a place with air conditioning was a premium at the time.

I'm happy to add that Ann Arbor's off campus housing is still stuck in the same century as their football team schemes. For what people pay to go there, living off campus is replete with houses built in 1890, with couches on the porch and peeling paint. Of course, the townies on the other side of town keep their places up, but the student housing is what OSU's used to be.  Whenever I have to drive though the student housing areas , I vacillate between PTSD and satisfaction that these students are paying ten times what I did to live in squalor.

HS
Fatpants's picture

What years were you there? I was there 94-98 and the university was trying to work with the city to push the slumlords out.

PG <3 PG

HS
BeaverOhioBuckeye's picture

I see what you're saying man I was just having a little fun at your expense. If you want my honest opinion you lived the College lifestyle and you should enjoy it. Wear it as a badge of honor and smile.

HS
Das Hufeisen's picture

+1

AKA the Horseshoe, the Shoe, and the House That Harley Built

HS
stxbuck's picture

Boom! Rant of the year so far. Preach the truth brother, preach!

HS
Bags5150's picture

Agree!  College playoffs and NFL playoffs couldn't be more different.  That's like comparing March Madness with the MLB & the World Series.  Totally different.

Now if you took the conferences and could somehow match them like NFL divisions...then you've got something...but you can't so there's that.

I LOVE when someone points out that someone doesn't know anything about something...and they can't possibly know it themselves.

Through my job I've known alot of big time college athletes.  It's a full time job.  I think that college athletes should get some sort of payment beyond their schooling, but I just think it's too hard to ever determine what it should be and what is fair and equitable across the board.

Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth~Mike Tyson

HS
kmp10's picture

College athletes are no more exploited than the NFL players LeBron James says are subject to the 'slave mentality' of the league's team owners. At the end of the day, no one is forced to play college football. No one. What's more, college football/basketball players are getting FAR more than you imply. In addition to free housing in cities like Chicago, NYC, LA, San Diego, and the San Francisco bay area, which are some of the world's most expensive cities in which to live, they receive 'scholarship checks" (monetary), first-class travel and accommodations, free everything that has anything to do with their education, healthcare, food, and about a scroll's worth of advantages that the students who pay for the aforementioned expenses do not get. I believe, altho I could be off a bit, that the latest statistics say less than 4% of FBS players will go on to play professional football (and that includes arena leagues and the CFL), so 96% will be joining the American workforce... and they'll do so debt free, degree in hand, and with a business network that the 'regular student' can only dream of. Is college football a necessary 'evil' on the way to the NFL for a player like Nick Bosa? Yes, it is. But for the VAST majority, college football is one helluva deal in a multitude of ways. 

When I die, sprinkle my ashes over the 70's 

HS
BTBuckeye's picture

V is for voluntary. I do agree with that. 

HS
NYWoodyFan's picture

The poster makes very valid points. I believe the new league allows players to skip college and play for pay, an important option that should be factored in. 

Matt

HS
Ludwig Yards's picture

Heard some of that discussion as well. Hooley also said he'd like to see scholarships reduced to 70 per school, to create more parity. 

HS
ATHENS GA BUCKEYE's picture

The value of the brand is not relevant to the argument, but major universities do make a significant amount of money off of their star mens football and basketball players, who in turn are compensated with a free education, free meals, free books, a monthly stipend, and a whole bunch of other free stuff from people surrounding the program that nobody needs to know about.

Those star players have a valid argument when claiming that they should be compensated.  If you're making a million bucks selling my jersey because of me, I should get a cut of that. etc.

The problem is that if you pay Dwayne Haskins (yes I know he's gone, but he was the star player last year so he's the example), then you have to pay the rest of the team.  And if you pay the football team then you have to pay everyone, and most likely everyone would get the same amount, which would dilute the amount you're paying Haskins to the point where it was no longer meaningful.  Ohio State has something like 35 varsity sports.  It's not economically feasible to pay how ever many thousand student athletes they have.  And if it's not economically feasible for Ohio State, it's not economically feasible for anyone. 

And you'd better know your numbers, because you can't put the lid back on that box once you've opened it.

I suspect that if players ever do get paid, which I believe some should, it will be tied into either merchandise sales, and/or march madness and bowl money.  If you buy the #7 jersey Haskins gets a cut.  If you play for a team that plays on TV, then you get a share of that TV revenue.  If you don't, you get nothing.  That system would get the highest profile players the lion's share of the money.  And it would stop you from having to pay the 400 people on the swim and indoor/outdoor track and field teams.  Or in my case locally, the equestrian team... in what is a brilliant move to skirt title 9 rules, UGA has 100 girls on their equestrian team. 

I have no idea if this compensation scenario is plausible, but it sounds better than anything else I've heard.

And for the record, I don't know Chris Spielman or Bruce Hooley personally, but I assume they're good intelligent people. I didn't hear their argument this morning, but it sounds like an uninformed one to me.

HS
BuckeyeInOrlando's picture

I suspect that if players ever do get paid, which I believe some should, it will be tied into either merchandise sales, and/or march madness and bowl money.  If you buy the #7 jersey Haskins gets a cut.  If you play for a team that plays on TV, then you get a share of that TV revenue.  If you don't, you get nothing.  That system would get the highest profile players the lion's share of the money.  And it would stop you from having to pay the 400 people on the swim and indoor/outdoor track and field teams.  Or in my case locally, the equestrian team... in what is a brilliant move to skirt title 9 rules, UGA has 100 girls on their equestrian team.

I agree with you that this seems to be a good solution to the problem. I think there are far too many variables still. The Big Ten Network airs volleyball, wrestling, softball, baseball, and many other sports that don't generate income for the universities and presumably don't draw large television numbers. I'll assume the Longhorn Network, SEC network, etc. do the same. How do you determine what percentage of TV revenue these student athletes receive? Equate it to the percentage of viewership in a given year? Equate it to the percentage of ad sales revenue during their sport? What about replays? Does Troy Smith get paid royalties every time they show The Game from 2006?

HS
ATHENS GA BUCKEYE's picture

Also, the playoff will definitely expand because there's money to be made.  

And i'm sure they'll do it all wrong.

HS
westy81585's picture

Hooley is a turd.  I remember during the tattoo-gate thing he was ranting and raving about how his degree from Ohio State was less valuable as a result of this.  

News flash: if you only valued your college degree because of the football program at that University; it wasn't worth the paper it was printed on to begin with.  

I wouldn't pay any attention to the dramatic crap he says.  

As far as Spiels, dunno what to tell you.  Just have to agree to disagree with him on the playoff thing.  I'd be happy to see college-athletes get paid or at least be allowed to use their likeness to make money on the side (selling advertisements, etc).  

HS
Fatpants's picture

Lots of people make tons of money on college sports. A very small percentage of the athletes ever get paid for using up their bodies for our entertainment.

PG <3 PG

HS
Bosco Baracus's picture

the games are meant to be played on the field.

Bowls games are stupid money grabs for rich assholes who already have money. Players are exploited. And the NfL is a far superior product.

Yea I know tradition and every game means something, but until the ncaa goes to a 8 or 16 playoff The same teams will win every year. Maybe if there was more teams getting into the playoffs every 5 star wouldn’t feel the need to go to Bama to make sure they get a ring. The lack of parody is boring. Giving the teams who make the final 4 a MONTH to prep and heal up is unfair.  But need to make sure u have those prime spots for sponsors and more viewers to line the ncaa’s pocket and the rich get richer. 

HS
Fatpants's picture

And the NfL is a far superior product.

The lack of parody is boring.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. College is cyclical, teams rise and fall. Forced parody doesn't work. Tom Brady won his first super bowl with the Patriots the same year Miami won the natty. Imagine having to still hear about DA U as a contender every year.

PG <3 PG

HS
Bosco Baracus's picture

On this site I’d say a major majority would rather hear about the U than any SEC team....

and the lack of parity being boring is showing in the tv ratings. 

HS
Fatpants's picture

That's only because we haven't heard about the U for quite a while now.

PG <3 PG

HS
stxbuck's picture

Yes, forced comedy isn't very good. Joe Stalin proved that. Forced parity isn't all that great either.

HS
osuflacco's picture

Hooley is a hack, was so disappointed when he was the new big morning host in Cbus, ugh. 

Players not being compensated at this point is absurd, non-revenue generating sports schollies should not be subsidized by revenue generating athletes.  

HS
BrewstersMillions's picture

Kliff Kingsbury went from College Head Coach-to College Coordinator-then signing day happened-then he bounced to the NFL before a single play of his was run at USC by guys that commited to the program he was a part of.

Manny Diaz was a college DC, then a college coach, then another college coach at another program in a span of three weeks. In those three weeks, players committed to him and his new program-again a single play was not run by the guys that comitted to him-that he undoubtedly had to convince to commit as a new head coach.

Todd Graham tells his team on a jet via text from Pit to ASU that he is leaving them.

Justin Fields choses to go to a school where can compete for a starting job, decides that place is not the best one for him to succeed at and will have to beg the NCAA to allow him to play and not sit at a place he can see immediate success.

Shea Patterson goes to a program that takes the NCAA rule book for little more than a drink coaster, and has to jump through hoops to go to a program not facing sanctions.

Mike Williams was allowed to declare for the NFL because a rule was changed, the rule was changed back and he wasn't allowed back to college because he did what a previous rule said he could.

Remind me again, who isn't getting exploited? Do the kids see some benefit from rides to football factories? For sure. But I personally won't hold the value of X University's education when the program itself generally doesn't care if they get one. If a kid is a star student and star athlete its used as recruiting fuel for the program he's starring in.

Proudly dispensing unbridled arrogance since 1983.

HS
Bolt's picture

I definitely think the NCAA can do a better job in gray areas and ruling on things on a case by case manner, such as was the very highly unusual case with Mike Williams. I also think the transfer rules and eligibility stuff need cleaned up and need more reason. I get why the NCAA thinks they have to be cut and dry because they'll claim the slippery slope argument (which is often a fallacious argument), but they go against reason and common sense all too often.

My rebuttal to what you're saying regarding the benefits the coaches get is that the coaches all went to school, mostly all of them played football and mostly all of them had to adhere to the same rules that these student/athletes do. It's not as if they were born as 40-something year old men with a foot in the door. They got their foot in the door and their opportunities to make big dollars and move around specifically because they were part of the process and no one is limiting these kids from pursuing the same when they're out of school. These coaches spent the same time in school and even spent years making almost literally nothing for years while they try to climb the ranks and get good coaching jobs. If coaches are behaving irresponsibly, they will have those marks on them for their professional career. If they continuously do it, they can find themselves on the outside looking in and no one willing to take another chance on them, so in a sense they're hurting themselves. But they're allowed to, because they already put in the time as amateurs, they are no longer amateurs, but are hired employees.

HS
Bolt's picture

I've somewhat softened my stance on the amateurism thing over the years, but I still take issue when people say these guys are being straight up exploited. College football isn't something that people are forced into, these guys are willingly showing up for a reason. They get a free education worth thousands of dollars, but beyond that, that degree allows them to make significantly more money over their lifetime without student debt to pay back...It's annoying when people just throw out the static dollar amount of how much college costs as the only benefit. These guys often get better opportunities to enter the work force than a normal undergraduate so long as they care even a little about their grades (which, they have free access to all sorts of resources and tutors that most never do), especially in a town like Cbus where they can take their pick of many different jobs after graduating and having been a football player on their resume. The small percentage of lucky and hard working collegiate players that are good enough are groomed to make millions in the NFL. 

Another argument I can't stand is when people compare coaches to the players, saying "well look how much money the coaches are making while the players get nothing!" This is so dumb to me, because basically ALL of these coaches went through the same damn process many of these athletes did when they were at the same age. Urban Meyer wasn't just some guy that showed up out of the blue and suddenly became a multi-million dollar coach. He went to school and played collegiate athletics just like the rest of them and it did nothing but open the door for him to get into the coaching profession. These coaches spend their younger years getting paid next to nothing as quality control analysts, GAs and eventually position coaches.

And this isn't really different from many other industries too! A kid with a full ride who is destined to be a genetic engineer or something like that has to go to school to get a job in his/her field. He/she have to spend years in grad school, med school, whatever. They participate in projects and research while in school that greatly benefits the university and brings in further grants and they don't see a dime from it as far as I'm aware. Then they go on to get great paying jobs when they're done with school. Then there's the rest of us who don't get school for free. I came out of school during the recession and there was nothing in the way of jobs for a 22 year old stepping out into the world with an economics degree in hand. Now I work a 9-5 job that I don't care for because I had to take what I could get and I'm still paying off student loans a decade later. 

Certain things I can absolutely understand, such as the school shouldn't be making money off of the player's likeness and probably shouldn't be selling the player's jersey for their own profit while the student/athlete doesn't see a dime from that. I think we can do away with selling individual players' numbers like they've gravitated toward...or, if we would really rather continue to sell individual player numbers, put the cut of the money the player should be earning into some sort of trust that they would have access to after exhausting their NCAA eligibility.

HS
JCam061588's picture

They are being exploited. While Urban is doing commercials for grocery chains, Braxton promoting Advocare is a compliance issue. The driving force of the industry is the least compensated, least protected, & most restricted faction within it. That is exploitation. 

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
BrewstersMillions's picture

Bingo.

Proudly dispensing unbridled arrogance since 1983.

HS
avail31678's picture

I tend to agree, good points.  I hope as a human there's something they can do for the players, and as a fan I hope whatever they might come up with still keeps college football and it's competitiveness fun and fair.

HS
Bolt's picture

I'm not sure if I should reply or direct you to the paragraph in my stupid novel which addresses coaches being compared to players. It's apples and oranges. You're comparing an amateur athlete to a professional employee. That's more like saying a student at Ohio State is pissed because their well known professor is getting paid while they're doing all the work. You'd want to compare what students vs students go through and these athletes aren't just better taken care of than normal students, they get access to better opportunities than students. Students that aren't athletes generate money for their departments as well and they see no money from it...the money is re-invested into the school and upgrades to the department/program, much like with the athletic department. Urban Meyer wasn't born a 40-something year old man with multi-million dollar coaching offers in his pocket. Urban Meyer went to school and played collegiate athletics much the same as these students did. He's had no different circumstances in his experiences than these players and if they so choose and work hard enough, they can follow the same path. 

HS
JCam061588's picture

You talk about comparing apples to oranges then compare the dynamic between a professor/student to that of a player/coach? You can't be serious. No student can do for a professor what Tebow & Braxton did for Urban. Better yet, show me the student that has jerseys being sold for $150 a pop or becomes a pariah because for flunking a test. Show me a class 110,000 people paid money to watch take their final & that Fox paid 2.6 billion dollars to air live. Show me a class that Nike paid 252 million dollars to sponsor over the next 15 years. What makes separates an amateur from a professional is a profit & the only reason college football players cannot profit from their ability while in college is because the system literally strips of their ability to do so. 

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
CincyBuck's picture

Show me a class 110,000 people paid money to watch take their final & that Fox paid 2.6 billion dollars to air live.

Ah, 20-30 years later, the classic quote from The Program rings even truer now than ever: "when was the last time 80,000 people showed up to watch a kid do a damn chemistry experiment?!?!?" 

HS
stxbuck's picture

But P&G or Phizer or Orkin or whomever will move far more than 80,000 units of whatever said chemistry grad student is doing research/quality control testing on for them.........................

HS
Bolt's picture

No student can do for a professor what Tebow & Braxton did for Urban. Better yet, show me the student that has jerseys being sold for $150 

The school no longer does this, because it was wrong. I absolutely believe it was wrong and am glad that they stopped. 

or becomes a pariah because for flunking a test.

Come on, people flunk out of school all the time and it dramatically affects their lives. If anything the football program makes it so you damn near have to try to fail. They have everything set up for them, scheduled for them, catered to them, tutors, resources, etc that none of us have.

Show me a class 110,000 people paid money to watch take their final

You're right...instead, millions of us pay significantly more money to attend said classes and take the final. And aside from that, it'll be impossible to quantify, but the amount of social benefit we all get from university research might not be people tuning into a game, but it affects every day life. And in every industry, this is the bargaining chip that's held over the young, inexperienced and uneducated. You have to gain said experience, you have to get a degree in said field. You can be a straight-A superstar student your whole life, but you still have to obtain a degree and achieve a level or prerequisites before you'd even be in consideration to be hired. In this case, that's the NFL. The NFL could dictate that students don't have to wait 3 years. Ohio State is an academic institution and they are in the business of preparing young men and women for their futures. As a part of that, any revenue that they generate is re-invested into the school to keep up with their standing as one of the top universities in the country. That goes for the football team, that goes for the biology department, that goes for the business school, etc. The money generated by the football team is re-invested into the athletic department to keep it as one of the best in the country, Urban Meyer is merely an investment in the top coach the same way the business school would invest in department leadership that's among the best in the country. All of this is to say that the university is not in the business of handing out money to its students regardless. It's in the business of preparing young ones for their futures and continuously building and maintaining their standing out of the sake of survival. Where my statement about the NFL comes in, is that due to their industry standard rule of having to be 3 years removed, it forces the players that could be making some money to choose to enroll in a system that is not meant or intended to put money in their pockets while their there, but will prepare them for the future just like any other student...whether that means the NFL some day or managing a hedge fund some day.

What makes separates an amateur from a professional is a profit & the only reason college football players cannot profit from their ability while in college is because the system literally strips of their ability to do so. 

The thing is, I'm actually for any student being able to make money, have a job, etc while they're in school. I'd be happy for Braxton to make money promoting a product while he's a student, just like I'd be fine with some kid in the business school making a bunch of money as a YouTube streamer or something. Where it gets tricky, is how the NCAA follows this as they don't want it to turn into straight up free agency and paying a player. They believe it would be impossible to prevent them from taking huge sums of money by boosters for jobs not worked and things like that. I think there could be some gray area there that they could try and take into account, but I don't have a great idea how or if it's really even necessary. I just don't think the schools themselves should be paying players with the money they bring in, I don't have a problem with players making their own coin on the side.

HS
ATHENS GA BUCKEYE's picture

One more thing since I'm here...

To all of the people on this site who called me a troll and whatnot 4 weeks ago when I said I knew for a fact that Justin Fields was transferring to Ohio State... Who's trolling who now?

HS
RK84's picture

You should probably spin up and I told you so thread. Just to drive the point home.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
JCam061588's picture

Huh? It wasn’t exactly a secret. That story picked up steam fast.

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
bucks4nuts's picture

hooley is a piece of work.. and is the haawwwt take guy.. He loves to bash bash bash

"To The House"

HS
Dasniksder's picture

I think the players are well compensated. They get free tuition, free OSU gear, free food and snacks, and a monthly stipend of around $1200 (I might be wrong on the amount). Yes some players deserve more but I don’t know how you would decide who those players are and how you would prevent recruiting from becoming a highest bidder game. I guess if players want more money, then they can enter a college draft and get paid based on their draft position. I like things the way they are. 

With that said, I completely understand Spielman’s position on it. I can only imagine how much money OSU has made on Spielmans likeness and by selling #36 jerseys.

HS
JCam061588's picture

I’m with Spiels, College Football is a business & any system that pretends like it’s not for ONLY the driving force of the industry is inherently flawed. The driving force of the industry is the most restricted & the least compensated faction. That is wrong, no matter how you slice it. 

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
Das Hufeisen's picture

That's one argument. Comparing them to slave labor is another.

AKA the Horseshoe, the Shoe, and the House That Harley Built

HS
JCam061588's picture

It’s a metaphor, we all have enough common sense to grasp the context of the comparison without taking it literally. When an athlete calls a tough game a “war” are we getting on our soap box to point out just how different a sporting event is from actual war or do we accept the context of the statement & move on? 

"Because I couldn't go for three"

HS
ohst8buxCP's picture

If you’re listening to anything other than Bishop and Laurinaitis in the morning you’re doing it wrong.

HS
Earle's picture

Hooley is paid to have opinions, the more controversial the better.  He's a glorified carnival barker.

Spielman has a unique perspective on the issue.  I respect his opinion, even if I don't wholly agree with it.

Neither is unintelligent, and I don't think Spielman is being disingenuous.  

Axe leukemia!
#Poppystrong

HS
ohiopanda's picture

I’ve never fully understood the idea of paying college players. No one is forcing them to play. Would Spielman be where he is without Ohio State? Was his college years of “sacrificing his body” and being just so busy not worth it? If being a college student and football player is too difficult and unfair, then just be a college student or just a football player. An option should exist for players to jump immediately into an NFL system where they can be paid, but honestly how many would?

Typical students advance academically while paying the school. Student athletes advance academically and athletically while getting a lot of benefits. Both make money for schools at different levels, but there is no one requiring they be an athlete with a shot at a pro millionaire future. 

HS
BeaverOhioBuckeye's picture

I'm just going to say this 1. I don't think that college kids should be paid by the school but I have no Issue with J.K Dobbins or any other player of any sport at OSU sitting at the corner of Lane and High and talking pictures and selling autographs for whatever price he wants to ask for in between classes or after games. 2. I'm also tired of hearing about how these college athletes get a free education so they should shut up and be happy with it. Cut the shit its a full time job and a job that 50% of us on this site probably couldn't juggle if we tried so they should get a pass on certain extra benefits and perks. 3. Make the CFP and 8 team playoff and be done with it High School and the lower NCAA divisions can figure it out and D1 should as well.

HS
Keze's picture

You would be taking extra income for all but 8 schools by taking an OOC game away.Sounds good but most schools need that extra income.

Actually breaking it down from 4 team to 8 team playoff.

4 teams would play the exact same amount of games per year. (first 4 losing teams round 1)

2 teams would play 1 more game ( losing in second round)

2 team would play 1 more game.(Going to final)

4 team playoff ( highest rank team wins)

#1 plays 2 games

#2 plays 2 games

#3 plays 1 game

#4 plays 1 game

8 team playoff ( highest rank team wins)

#1 plays 3 games

#2 plays 3 games

#3 plays 2 games

#4 plays 2 games

#5 plays 1 game ( 1 game  same as playing in bowl game)

#6 plays 1 game

#7 plays 1 game

#8 plays 1 game

HS
BeaverOhioBuckeye's picture

Make the first RD games home games

HS
osu992's picture

Ignorance is not dishonesty or an intellectual defect. They are outside of their realm of expertise. Most people are. Most people have no expertise in anything.

New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.

HS
stxbuck's picture

I'd argue that spouting off on a subject outside your realm of expertise in an authoritative manner is in fact an intellectual defect. Don't outkick your intellectual coverage.

HS
osu992's picture

I'd argue that few know their limits and we shouldn't be afraid to discover them in the presence of those who can improve our understanding.

New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.

HS
stxbuck's picture

Well, that is a perfectly valid pov, and I don't disagree, but I don't think interwebz hottakes correlate w/ the last part of your comment!

HS
osu992's picture

I don't disagree with that either. The issue wouldn't be whether Spielman and Hooley knew these things, but whether they made an effort to get, or avoided the obstruction of getting, a more informed perspective on the show, whether that's a caller or guest. Of course, if they are just using this as a lead in to discussing the dubiousness of "amateurism," then they probably aren't putting any thought into the headline that lead them down that discussion. Like someone recently said "Facts don't matter when you're morally right."

New Day for OSU. Same noon for TTUN.

HS
McGrind's picture

Here in AA, I stream them rather than listen to Sam and his “Michigan Apologist” show. But neither prep for the show or bring anything of real value to the table. Speils never talks X and Os...just old and slightly crazy stories...today about losing his wallet. 

BTW..check the recruiting rankings for Clemson...just a very slight edge over ttun. If your input is the same no need to adjust anything to level the playing field. Just do more with what you have.

ttun 2019 offense...same pig, different lipstick.

HS
Bratwurstcapitalbuckeye's picture

Spielman can be a real ass. I met him once, and I hope I never do again.

Go Bucks!

HS
RK84's picture

I've had the opposite experience in my interactions with him. Always polite and easy to talk with.

Sure my company gave him a bunch of money to speak, but I have run into him since and he always remembers me and chats for a few minutes.

It doesn't matter whether you're the lion or a gazelle-when the sun comes up, you'd better be running.

HS
Pahimar's picture

Interesting how those things work. Family legend is that John Glenn once treated my grandfather very rudely during a brief interaction. I try to keep in mind that he might have just been having a bad day or he could have been a legit arrogant jerk, hard t know without more data. Not that I blame you for feeling the way you do.

HS
rdalchemy's picture

6 team playoff would be enough to quiet the masses. #3,4,5, and 6 play each other to see who moves on to play #1 and 2—who enjoy a bye week.

Zbuddha

HS
jpfbucks01's picture

OK let me get at both of these

1) the pay for play - They are right even if they dont understand that value is not equal to profit

Here is why, first the argument about the value of training and facilities is simply silly. The NFL does the same things and they are able to play the players millions a year

The fact that OSU spends a bunch on things like the Woody etc is a specious argument as any pro team does this as well.

The reality is that even schools like Akron spend a ton of money on things that have little bearing on their ability to be competitive and hence are used as excuses to no pay them.

Akron this past season paid its coaching staff including Bowden nearly 1.2 million a year, after having spent over $62 million to build a new stadium they didnt need

Akron has zero chance to compete for national titles, so paying their staff even half what they did this year ie head coach about 150K and their assistants an average of 60K and the results may not have changed.

But that alone frees up $600K to be paid out to 85 football players or over $7K a player,

Now about that $62 million dollar stadium, thats enough to pay every MAC football player last year over $60K,

so don't tell me they don't have money to burn.

The voluntary thing is also a bit specious as no player has another option to realistically pursue a pro career other can going thru the NCAA cartel. (maybe the NAIA but there restrictions are essentially the same as the NCAA)

So if you want to pursue your career you are forced into a de facto unpaid internship with no other way to pursue it in reality, So it is not "voluntary", it is mandated and they must work FT in this "internship" for 3 years before having a chance to earn a living of any kind, either inside or outside this chosen profession. That is by definition a restriction of free trade and cartel based behavior.

If the NFL who seems to set some of these rules in term of eligibility to play can afford to pay guys like Tom Savage 200K a year to never take a snap for the worthless Bengals, then OSU et al can pay players 12K a year to play - easily

2) expanding the playoffs - Hooley and Speils are wrong - OSU's basketball regular season runs 4.5 months (Nov 1 - March 10 this year), counting the B1G tourney and a post season bid they will play to near the end of March, ie 5 full months at least

Football by comparison is only 4 months with a big chunk of December being practice only

Hoops players travel far more than Football players do in a season missing class time etc

OSU Football players traveled only for 7 games and since all their games are on Saturday and most of them were regional, hence the impact to schooling is minimal ie maybe 7-10 class days missed

OSU's hoops team will travel for a minimum of 12 games, and counting the B10 tourney and a post season bid it will likely be at least 14 games ie double the football team of which some of them are school days so the impact is much greater

Hoops teams practice just as often as football guys do etc.

all this given No one says that they play too many games, or the season lasts too long or it impacts their schooling,or the regular season is worthless etc

If OSU makes it to the regional final the will play for 22 weeks, with at least 1 game nearly every week and in most 2 or more

The football team be contrast plays 14 total games spread across 18+ weeks meaning they have 4+ weeks without games

adding 1 more week to 2 more teams being somehow too much,,,is a worthless arguement

When these guys go to the NFL they will play close to 20 games in just 22 weeks, so why cant 2 teams play 1 extra game ie a 16th game in that same 22 week time frame?? There is no reason, but the narrative about Student athletes (see #1 above) is the BS given for restricting this.

Besides we have already expended the season from 9 games in the 1960 to 15 now ie a 66.7% expansion in just 50 years

Expanding it another 7% for 2 teams as being too much is a joke

Pay the players

Expand the playoff

HS
wigmon's picture

Again, I am have not said that there is absolutely no argument to be considered.  ITs the lack of recognition and acceptance that scholarship athletes already receive significant compensation for their athletic participation and that while the NCAA is a big business that generates a lot of revenue, most of that revenue goes to administration and back into the universities that fund sports and other programs that would not otherwise be able to exist. 

- the NCAA doesn't set the rules for NFL eligibility, so they have no culpability in the lack of a free market for those 21 years of age or younger.  There is no age limit in the CFL (I assume that is still the case), so any player could choose to go play there and the good players would easily earn 10 times as much as anyone has proposed paying college athletes.  Or, if their image apart from a university is worth so much, they could capitalize on that by marketing themselves anyway they see fit and not attend college.  The fact that no football player has chosen to do this tells me that the most significant contribution to their marketability comes from the university (and its fan base) that they are representing.  I mean a lot of fans would have gone out to buy an OSU #16 jersey with Barrett on the back.  His likeness/name wasn't worth squat before the university gave him an opportunity to play football here.  In exchange for providing free room and board, education,skills training, mentoring, exposure, competitive environment, etc., the student athlete is helping the university sell their image and generate revenue.  I think its a pretty fair trade where both parties are gaining something that is not insignificant.  ITs your option to dismiss it out of hand, but the reality is that a scholarship football player at OSU gets well over $100K in benefits a year.  People are certainly free to argue they deserve more, but what they do get is very significant and those that overlook or ignore it are being dishonest.

- Most DI football programs are not profitable and the ones that are use that revenue to fund other athletic and even academic programs that would not otherwise be able to exist.  A handful of the "football factories" could afford to compensate players a minimal amount.  I don't see how that helps create a fair and "balanced" athletic association.

But, lets just say for the heck of it that everyone agrees, so lets start paying players.  Give me a model that works and is fair.  Does every football player make the same money (star QB to third string punter)?  IS every D1 football program required to pay each player?  Do walk ons get paid?   Is every other sport also required to pay players?  Do lower division NCAA scholarship athletes get paid?  How is their compensation determined?  Title IX is surely going to argued, so how do you account for the compensation of those athletes.  I've never seen anyone who has suggested paying athletes come up with a reasonable plan that covers all NCAA scholarship athletes at all institutions.

HS
Nick's picture

That's because the reality is that turning college into a free minor league for the NFL would be bad for the vast majority of schools that already have to take student fees to operate and female and non revenue generating sports like gymnastics etc would all have to be eliminated.

And you are spot on that most of the value of college players is the college brand they play for. I'm sure some could market themselves and make some money but we are probably talking about a handful of players every 5-10yrs or so that would be able to do so.

But with all that, a player should be able to create and sell their own merchandise, stream online content and receive compensation, and engage in other commercial activities like any other student at the school would be able to do. That costs the school nothing and it lets the market decide if their brand has value. Obviously schools would be forbidden to assist in these activities or promote these activities and the universities' logos and trademarks would also be off limits for use as well.

HS
Homey1970's picture

Speaking of profits and benefits, is anybody calculating all of the incidentals the student-athletes receive (like shoes, clothing, etc.)?  Also, if we start compensating the student-athlete above the ‘total cost of attendance’, can the schools then go back and collect from the non-performers?

I agree that expanding the playoffs to add automatic conference champions will make more games relevant during the regular season because schools could still lose multiple game and still win their conference titles.

HS
Sanitarian2's picture

Employees are not entitled to a percentage of the gross profits, let alone the value of their employers businesses. That's an idiotic position to take and is counter to the American way. Perhaps the colleges that trained, equipped, paid for housing, food, medical care and tuition of their students should get a percentage of the students gross income after they go Pro. Hell, perhaps they should get a percentage of ALL students future income, athlete or not.

Sani

HS
hnyg8modonwelfare's picture

GREAT post!! Agree 100% with your first topic.  I laugh every time I hear that student athletes are being exploited. 

To answer your question -in my opinion Hooley is very stupid and he's very dishonest as well; so he's handicapped 2x.

Speilman probably just sees it through the eyes of a former NFL player.  It might be somewhat of a heated political issue with him as former players feel like they've been used as meat. My answer to that is, don't play football then. We know football is not healthy but they are still paid well enough. In college they benefit well enough already.

Thank you Urban Meyer and Gene Smith

HS
buckstoo's picture

What about the exploited high school football players? Doesn’t anyone care that they have to go the college route first before going to the NFL? They all choose to play the game no one is holding a gun to their head.

HS
jpfbucks01's picture

HS kids are for the most part minors and hence much of labor law etc is different with them

I would never players are slaves or indentured servants, but as I described they are unpaid interns

and yeah in some high schools that pay a coach over 100K like in Texas, then yeah maybe those players should get some of that revenue

HS
Buckeyeinsc's picture

This may come across as salty but boo-fucking-hoo.

No one is forcing you to do anything. If you don't like what you are doing, quit. This is voluntary.

I played D1 as a non-scholarship athlete. I kept at it because it was a sport I loved and my last chance to play it. Scholarship athletes have a cake walk. They play stuff up to be much harder than it is. Beyond just tuition coverage you are afforded advantages through better housing, food, clothing, stipend, book fees, training at world class facilities, nutritionists, full medical staff, tutoring, and a number of other hidden benefits.

Want to know how I paid for college while having to put in the same work (if not more)? I went and enlisted. Still came out with $70,000 in debt. Never once did I complain or feel like I deserved to be compensated? Why? Because it was a privilege to have the opportunity to represent my school. 

Conversation is pointless anyways. They have new leagues coming out that will be an alternative to college and pay the players a base salary. The choice will be up to the athletes: play for a good school and get an education or get paid to play in hopes of going to the NFL. 

Fighting the good fight in SEC country. "Our honor defend"

HS
jpfbucks01's picture

Company A decides to attract the best employees they can by investing heavily in making their work environment the best possible, top notch equipment to work with, new and state of the art work facilities

Company A hires the best managers and trainers for these potential employees they can afford so they get the best leadership and guidance and development possible

Company A then promotes their brand heavily to be even more attractive on the promise that later these employees may possibly be able to move up to a better employment opportunity

Company A adds in side benefits like paying for education classes for employees, reduced or even free high quality meals and reduced or free but low quality housing and gifts etc, company paid travel and on and on

---

Now can company A refuse to pay said employees because they chose to provide all these "advantages" to entice the workers to come work for them?

Can that company then also restrict how and when I can leave the company and which competing firm I can go to work for instead, (ie limited no compete clauses) and deny me the ability to potentially be employed outside my time dedicated to the firm to better my financial condition while remaining employed with them?

Add in that the work I am doing is physically dangerous and that I am required to take the education benefits you offer me whether i wish to or not and whether I find value in them or not

And that at anytime Company A could terminate my agreement at anytime but still restrict where I can go to work for a competing firm

I am willing to say that no one in this forum would sign up for that deal for at least 3 years of there

Now change the name of Company A to any major university and that is what the NCAA cartel is

HS
Buckeyeinsc's picture

It is called VOLUNTEERISM and it completely negates your argument. 

You do NOT have to go to any of these companies but you do with the hope of something better on the other side.

- Signed
Someone that took the deal and is better for it.

Fighting the good fight in SEC country. "Our honor defend"

HS
jpfbucks01's picture

Are you insinuating that OSU football is a charity that the players volunteer their services to?? OSU football is an obvious for profit organization

If I choose to volunteer my time to help a hospital, they cannot restrict my ability to earn money elsewhere while helping,

they cant choose who else I may volunteer for, say the clinic across the street as an example or a competing organization,

they cant require me to perform additional "un-paid work" (think the classroom requirement for players) just because I help the hospital.

How many D1 players would view themselves as "volunteers"

Besides in some situations like volunteering for military service, you still get paid for your work and a quick search on indeed shows over 22K paid volunteer jobs

You want it both ways, the ability not to pay them by considering them volunteers, but then putting de facto work restrictions on them as though they were employees

HS
Pahimar's picture

Yes, company A can do almost all of those things under contract law. Anyone could start an paid, professional football league at anytime for under 21 players to compete with college football (heck the CFL exists) and most of the things that you list that Company A couldn't do under contract law also go away. The fact is such leagues are not thriving and paying the high salaries that you think the players deserve because:

1.) The fans prefer the product that college football provides

2.) A lot of the college football infrastructure outside the powerhouses is not that profitable and/or being subsidized by donations which people are freely giving them.

3.) Apparently, the players prefer the opportunities that are being given to them in college football to what they would get in the CFL or some such.

Notably, such a dual system does exist in baseball. Lots of players choose to go get a free college education instead of spending 2-3 years in single A ball getting paid barely enough to live on.

Also, I am a physician and your description of "Company A" is remarkably similar to residency, other than that, instead of free room, board, and the interest on my loans getting paid by the company, I got paid a small salary which paid for my room, board, and the interest on my loans and left me a tiny amount of discretionary income smaller than most of the stipends that people have proposed for college football players. Residency is even 3 years long...so...

TL;DR - Yes that can happen. Welcome to real life.

HS
Sanitarian2's picture

Almost sounds like an internship with promotion to CEO in three years, one if employed by company B. I would sign up for that deal in a second. 

Sani

HS
BeatMeechigun's picture

Debatable topics but I don't see anything wrong with their perspectives.  In fact, I agree on the 8-team playoff diluting the regular season (especially if CCGs are maintained as those results would no longer matter as many times both participants from the SEC and Big Ten would be in).

I love the idea of the student athlete who puts the books down, shoulders up the pads, straps on a helmet and goes and knocks around some foes wearing another color sweater from a rival school on a fall Saturday afternoon for his alma mater.

The problem is that athletic departments and conferences are preaching the "good-ole" nature of the historic purpose but their actions are driven by $$$ EVERY SINGLE TIME.  Why is the NCG on a Monday night?  Because the athletes would rather be studying on Saturday afternoons or because Monday night is the preferred TV slot?  Why is the Big Ten now assigning conference games to Friday nights?  Because that benefits the student athlete or because it allows BTN to fill more TV slots?  Why is the NCAA tournament made of 68 instead of 64 teams?  Because those extra 12 round-ballers from 19-11 "power 5 conference state university" deserve that shot - or because ESPN can showcase two Tuesday night games featuring at least one team in each with a major fan following.  It's why Maryland and Rutgers are now in the Big Ten.  It's why NCGs start at 8pm and go til midnight.  $$$.  EVERY SINGLE TIME.

Personally, I'd love for conferences to agree that 40 bowl games diminishes the quality of the sport.  To agree that championship games should be on Saturdays instead of the prime TV slot.  To agree that UCF probably deserved in the CFP last year despite not brining a substantial fanbase of viewers.  But until Ath. Depts. and Conferences start making decisions that truly are in the best interest of the sport and the student athlete instead of chasing the money grab every time, then the specific student athletes responsible for the fan interest that is directly generating that revenue deserve to be rewarded.

Is 100k of free tuition an acceptable reward?  Sure... if the kid desires a degree in Business or Philospohy or Law.  But most of the student athletes directly responsible for the lion's share of the profits are the same who have no interest in that degree (right or wrong) and will be leaving early to play in the NFL, NBA, MLB, or Europe.  That would be like a company rewarding my work in travel vouchers instead of dollars.  Are free trips worth something?  Absolutely.  But if I don't desire to travel then their compensation isn't worth a damn thing to me.

Minimally, it's time to give free reign for them to sell their memorabilia, autographs, etc.  If Universities don't want to pay athletes based on the revenue they generate or cannot do so because of Title IX, I get it.  But don't cripple their ability to market themselves and capitalize on their worth.

HS
Buckeyeinsc's picture

I think the best compromise that we can all agree on would be compensation for jersey sales / likeness. Not sure what share of the cut a school gets from that beyond the use of the logo but there should definitely be kick backs for that.

Fighting the good fight in SEC country. "Our honor defend"

HS
Sanitarian2's picture

How would the revenue be distributed, $1 to each player that has his name on a jersey, what about the second team kicker? What about girls diving. A BIG slush fund that evenly pays every athlete at every school in every sport?

Sani

HS
Urbanbuck's picture

When you start your post with an ad hominem attack that really sets the tone...

Also, if you don't think college athletes in money sports aren't exploited you might want to apply some of those adjectives you so freely applied in your title to your self.

Wahoo! Wahoo! Rip, Zip, Bazoo! I Yell. I Yell. For O.S.U.

HS
wigmon's picture

The two grossly misrepresented the facts (presenting their "facts" as undisputed).  Either they knowingly did that, or didn't know any better.  I think the title fits.  Maybe I could have used "willfully ignorant" as another possibility to "not very intelligent".  I did not comment on the validity of their opinion, I commented on how they presented the case for that opinion and how their support either willfully, or ignorantly ignore facts against their arguments.  One can make a valid case for why they believe college athletes should be compensated.  Suggesting the athletes (who chose to play college athletics voluntarily) are exploited and ignoring that they already get hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of compensation when making that argument is what I am highlighting.

And somewhat related, I think Speils was correct to ask the university to stop using his likeness on the Honda advertisement.  I think he is wrong to suggest that images of current players in uniform and on the field cannot be used by the university. 

HS
NYWoodyFan's picture

What about the century of football players who made Ohio State football what it is? And the members of the marching band? Student volunteers? Grad assistants? 

Do they deserve a return on their investment? Or just today’s privileged athletes who evidently invented Ohio State football?

Matt

HS
blu.fan's picture

I mostly agree with them. I think players at D1 schools who aren't going to college to "play school" really should be compensated in some fashion. Honestly, having more outlets for semipro football leagues, something like the minor leagues in baseball or hockey, makes more sense to me. But lets be honest. Billions of dollars come in, largely on the backs of players, and they aren't fairly compensated, imhe. Remember that the huge majority of college players never make it to the NFL. Between injuries, grades, and not being a starting star, college is as far as most go. Here's the google answer:

--High school senior players who go on to play NCAA men's football: About one in 17, or 5.8 percent. -- NCAA senior players drafted by an NFL team: About one in 50, or2.0 percent. -- High school senior players eventually drafted by an NFL team: About nine in 10,000, or 0.09 percent.

As regards the playoffs, I really would be fine with going back to two teams playing, instead of 4. I completely agree that 8 teams dilutes the bowl season completely. Here's an analogy. In the NCAA tournament, can you imagine the losers of the semifinal games playing each other to see who comes in third place? I just don't see a lot of interest in that kind of game, either by the players, or by the fans.

Now, full disclosure, this discussion is completely irrelevant to Michigan. They don't deserve to be in a 4 team or an 8 team playoff. But to be honest, what would an 8 team playoff have done in terms of the National Championship game? Are you suggesting that if only there were 8 games, OSU could have challenged Clemson or Alabama? I absolutely don't think so at all. And if we're honest, we all know that Bama and Clemson were head and shoulders above everyone else.

HS
OSU_JD's picture

Are you suggesting that if only there were 8 games, OSU could have challenged Clemson or Alabama? I absolutely don't think so at all. And if we're honest, we all know that Bama and Clemson were head and shoulders above everyone else.

Whaaat?

The same Clemson that plays in the garbage ACC, and who barely held on versus NC State and Syracuse?

Ohio State absolutely could have challenged either of those teams.  Are you contending that Clemson is head and shoulders above Alabama who is head and shoulders above everybody else?  Because those teams are great, but they aren't that great.

The Title Game shows that coaching is what matters.  Ohio State recruits at the same level as these two teams, so it would have come down to whether Urban had Saban's number.  Dabo did it, so it's completely possible.

HS
Molandisi's picture

The playoff remains only about who is getting the money. 

The feigned concern about the demand placed on the student athlete is all so much chaff meant for distraction.  The NCAA apparently doesn't have a significant level of concern for the academic well-being of FCS school athletes, as they let FCS schools participate in a ...  (wait for it) ...  TWENTY-FOUR team playoff!  North Dakota State, who has won seven national titles in eight years, has AVERAGED fifteen games per year since 2011.

The issue is that ESPN owns the bowls, and that FBS football doesn't give a cut of the pie to the NCAA but to the Conferences and the TV networks.

HS
GlassCityBuckeyes's picture

People tend to forget teams like The Citadel depend on the Bamas of the world for those game checks. Without them the entire athletic program tanks. Boring for fans but financially healthy for the Davids of the world.

Noon games suck

HS
wigmon's picture

"As regards the playoffs, I really would be fine with going back to two teams playing, instead of 4. I completely agree that 8 teams dilutes the bowl season completely. Here's an analogy. In the NCAA tournament, can you imagine the losers of the semifinal games playing each other to see who comes in third place? I just don't see a lot of interest in that kind of game, either by the players, or by the fans."

I think a reasonable debate can be had, but I am not quite sure I understand the analogy.  you really think a third place games between two teams who have lost and are eliminated from the championship holds the same intrigue as a semi-final game that determines who gets into the championship game?

Just to be clear, my believe in an 8 team playoff began the moment the BCS was set up 20 years ago.  Back then there was seldom a case where there were 2 teams that were clearly the best 2 in the country.  Then in 2002, we went undefeated and played Miami for the title.  IT was a legit title game because we were the only 2 undefeated teams, but Iowa, USC and maybe others were also legit contenders.  Same thing in 2014 with TCU and Baylor looking like teams that could have beaten any of those in the top 4.  My argument is based on making sure you include teams that legitimately could be the best teams at the end of the year, not just the few teams that played an easy schedule or survived an early loss or "look" like the best teams.  I think if you go to 8 teams you will definitely have years where you include teams that don't really have a chance, but if the system is set up properly, you will almost assuredly include every team that lays a legitimate claim as the best team in the country and I think that should be the goal.

HS