F the NCAA

[pdub]

I agree it won't go away but it will be minimized - perhaps down to the point where stipends, scholarships, room and board, the opportunity to play basketball for Kansas etc become more an incentive than the cash.
I think some of that money will go where the stars are and into a league where the Melo's and Zion's go.
I'd also press for the NCAA to minimize or eliminate the shoe/athletic companies presence in college basketball.

[NDballer13]

How would you suggest the NCAA minimize or eliminate their presence? Athletic departments not be allowed to have contracts with apparel companies? That decreases revenue from the school, while simultaneously adding expenses when it comes to purchasing jerseys, shoes, etc. Where would that money come from? Most likely spot would be the budget that pays for stipends, scholarships, room and board, etc.

[CrimsonNBlue]

And is there any evidence that growing the G league would cut back on the shady recruiting and dirty money in college ball? Is that suddenly gonna be taken over by a bunch of puritanical angels?

What if college ball is (and always has been) much closer to the kc phogushers than you’d like to think?

No.
But ending the age restriction to the NBA and making the G League lucrative will get more of the kids who don't have interest in attending college to play in the pros which means less money in college basketball.

Less money, maybe, but I don't think it will see less action. Nike is still going to want the best players at their schools. Same with Adidas. And Under Armor. Only change is that instead of knocked down Zion's door for him to go to Duke, you're looking at guys like McCormack and Dotson who are a bit more down the rankings and not the G League ready players. It's not like a player will sign an endorsement deal with Nike, then play for an Adidas school.

The shady recruiting/dirty money will still be there. The only thing that will change is the target.

To the notion that guys like Dotson and McCormack aren't already targets:

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/ ... leet-10353

[NDballer13]

No.
But ending the age restriction to the NBA and making the G League lucrative will get more of the kids who don't have interest in attending college to play in the pros which means less money in college basketball.

Less money, maybe, but I don't think it will see less action. Nike is still going to want the best players at their schools. Same with Adidas. And Under Armor. Only change is that instead of knocked down Zion's door for him to go to Duke, you're looking at guys like McCormack and Dotson who are a bit more down the rankings and not the G League ready players. It's not like a player will sign an endorsement deal with Nike, then play for an Adidas school.

The shady recruiting/dirty money will still be there. The only thing that will change is the target.

To the notion that guys like Dotson and McCormack aren't already targets:

https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/ ... leet-10353

Exactly. I didn't mean to imply those 2 weren't already targets, just suggesting the only change would be the "Top 5" targets are now guys ranked in the teens/20s of a recruiting database. I don't see anything the G League does having any impact on what goes on behind closed doors during recruiting.

Zion's aren't the must gets anymore, because they aren't going to college. Guys like Darius Garland are now the top college recruits and even they might not pick school.

[pdub]

How would you suggest the NCAA minimize or eliminate their presence? Athletic departments not be allowed to have contracts with apparel companies? That decreases revenue from the school, while simultaneously adding expenses when it comes to purchasing jerseys, shoes, etc. Where would that money come from? Most likely spot would be the budget that pays for stipends, scholarships, room and board, etc.

I'm not an expert in business.
Find a medium where shoe companies can help fund the programs but not to the tune of 15 million dollars a year.
I don't have the solve - just like it would difficult to solve how to pay college players through the schools - I just know I lean more towards college being an amateur sport ( less money in basketball rather than more ).

[PhDhawk]

How would you suggest the NCAA minimize or eliminate their presence? Athletic departments not be allowed to have contracts with apparel companies? That decreases revenue from the school, while simultaneously adding expenses when it comes to purchasing jerseys, shoes, etc. Where would that money come from? Most likely spot would be the budget that pays for stipends, scholarships, room and board, etc.

I'm not an expert in business.
Find a medium where shoe companies can help fund the programs but not to the tune of 15 million dollars a year.
I don't have the solve - just like it would difficult to solve how to pay college players through the schools - I just know I lean more towards college being an amateur sport ( less money in basketball rather than more ).

Pro sports negotiate a contract as a league, Individual teams don't negotiate their own contracts for apparel companies. No one seems to be up in arms about how unfair or unethical that is.

Not sure why there's a li'l group of lawyers who insist that the NCAA be the wild west and anything short of that is immoral.

[NDballer13]

How would you suggest the NCAA minimize or eliminate their presence? Athletic departments not be allowed to have contracts with apparel companies? That decreases revenue from the school, while simultaneously adding expenses when it comes to purchasing jerseys, shoes, etc. Where would that money come from? Most likely spot would be the budget that pays for stipends, scholarships, room and board, etc.

I'm not an expert in business.
Find a medium where shoe companies can help fund the programs but not to the tune of 15 million dollars a year.
I don't have the solve - just like it would difficult to solve how to pay college players through the schools - I just know I lean more towards college being an amateur sport ( less money in basketball rather than more ).

As long as shoe companies have a financial investment in something, they will want a return and will be involved in the sport. That's just Business 101 and doesn't take an expert. Whether it's 15 million or 15 thousand, they will want the best they can get from that. If that means bribing a kid to play for a school you're invested in, then that's what happens.

Schools are cutting programs the way it is. Eliminating deals with apparel companies could resulting in schools eliminating athletics all together.

[jfish26]

I like college basketball because it is different than the NBA.
You see teams like Dayton come together and have incredible seasons.
You have players who know they'll be playing their last season in competitive sports.
You don't have players in sprite commercials tweeting how unhappy they are with their current contract.

If college wants to be more like the NBA, just watch the better product, where the actual pros play.

Nothing that hasn't said before, but: KU is a weird school to follow if you're in this for the purity of it all.

[pdub]

I think it has gotten significantly worse over the last few years ( mid-late Self era ).
And I can't help that I was born and raised in Lawrence.

[pdub]

As long as shoe companies have a financial investment in something, they will want a return and will be involved in the sport...

Their logos are on the uniforms and shoes.
Let's not have them paying players to attend the colleges they support.

[ousdahl]

I think it has gotten significantly worse over the last few years ( mid-late Self era ).
And I can't help that I was born and raised in Lawrence.

you follow the Firebirds or the Chesty Lions?

[jfish26]

I think it has gotten significantly worse over the last few years ( mid-late Self era ).
And I can't help that I was born and raised in Lawrence.

Is putting recruits' dads on the staff really that different than shoe companies giving their parents money?

[pdub]

It's different.
It's not something that I like.
I'm not blind to the fact that Kansas ( and other big programs ) have been dirty. It just seems to have gotten worse to me.

[ousdahl]

has it gotten worse, or has it just had more and more light shed on what was happening all along?

I don't follow other schools as closely, but have other schools had to deal with loosing so much player eligibility cuz of The Rules?

If anything, other schools seem to shrug shit off. I wonder what woulda happened if we just said "so what" about Silvio, Billy, et al. Cuz it's not like being cautious about it got us anywhere.

[CrimsonNBlue]

has it gotten worse, or has it just had more and more light shed on what was happening all along?

Part of the reason the NCAA is moving on this is because it can't have its coaches, whom are also assets, being sent to jail now.

Technology gives and takes here.

[pdub]

has it gotten worse, or has it just had more and more light shed on what was happening all along?

I don't follow other schools as closely, but have other schools had to deal with loosing so much player eligibility cuz of The Rules?

If anything, other schools seem to shrug shit off. I wonder what woulda happened if we just said "so what" about Silvio, Billy, et al. Cuz it's not like being cautious about it got us anywhere.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/287 ... n-revenue/

[ousdahl]

Wait, what?

So the ncaa tournament generates more and more money, but the important thing is to make sure those generating the money get none of it?

[pdub]

The NCAA has the means to support the schools more to where they wouldn't all necessarily need the Nike's and Adidas's of the world.

But that shows how much more lucrative the NCAA has become and with money comes problems -- it's getting worse recently because there's just more money to be had.
Have you never heard mo money, mo problems?

[ousdahl]

I have.

I can’t believe Puffy Woods sank that putt.

But how would you suggest the NCAA support the schools?

And how would that be more feasible that simply N-I-L?

[NDballer13]

It's different.
It's not something that I like.
I'm not blind to the fact that Kansas ( and other big programs ) have been dirty. It just seems to have gotten worse to me.

What do you mean by gotten worse? Like 3rd parties (Adidas) getting involved as opposed to rich alum handing cash to players? Ever since I watched, with my own eyes, a player at a no name DII school get handed an envelope full of cash outside the locker room after a game I refuse to believe that any program at the D1 level is "clean".

Blue Chips was released in 1994 and they were demanding houses and new cars/tractors, so obviously this isn't some new practice that is just now coming to light. Ignorance has been bliss since the beginning days of the NCAA.

One dirty money aspect of college sports I would love to get a number on is how many games have been fixed by mobsters/bookies. I bet that number is a lot higher than people want to admit too.