Kansas Crimson

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 10:49 am**

jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 10:28 am
pdub wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 9:56 am
jfish26 wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 9:23 am Seems like there's some sort of historical precedent for this system, vis a vis passage to America, or payment of debts.
Fuck off.
I know it's not especially comfortable, but our country has a nasty history with labor exploitation, particularly of vulnerable/desperate groups.

"Amateurism," as applied in the modern economy, really does echo indentured servitude from the 1600s:

Servants typically worked four to seven years in exchange for passage, room, board, lodging and freedom dues. While the life of an indentured servant was harsh and restrictive, it wasn't slavery. There were laws that protected some of their rights.
https://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectiv ... in-the-us/

Debates persist about the general characteristics of early indentured servants, but they were certainly primarily younger English men in search of new opportunities for wealth and advancement that were unavailable to them at home.
https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/vi ... 4-0113.xml

To be very clear - the life of an amateur college basketball player today is clearly worlds better than that of an indentured servant in the 1600s. No one is saying amateurism is killing college basketball players.

But the theme is the same - needy young people contracting out of economic and personal freedoms, in order to emerge from the period of service with better opportunities.

The thing is - nobody would agree to this if they didn't need to, or if there were better options immediately available. Which is sort of the point here.

Like it or not, what you are doing is asking players to choose to take less than they're worth. There can be no question about the implications of that on who plays college basketball.

See my previous post.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 10:50 am**

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 10:38 am you can pick a major after the fact?

wild

No, if I recall correctly you have to apply for graduation a few weeks ahead of December/May/July and KU reviews your transcript--at that time, you have to select a major. There may be a general study major, not sure on that. My KU degree had only slightly more use that that.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 10:51 am**

Biggest bummer for me in this thread ( recently ) is now JFish is way down on the top 5 poster list.
Like down where CnB is...which is above dolomite but below illy.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 10:51 am**

jeez.

kinda seems like a cop out.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:00 am**

pdub wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 10:51 am Biggest bummer for me in this thread ( recently ) is now JFish is way down on the top 5 poster list.
Like down where CnB is...which is above dolomite but below illy.

The truth hurts, man. If players can't access, through a combination of cash compensation and all the cool shit that goes along with playing for KU, something approximating their market value, the ones who need the money will go get it somewhere else.

That certainly ends up with fewer kids from bad backgrounds getting university educations and playing college ball. I don't think that's a desirable result, for anyone involved, from the schools to the coaches to the players to the fans to the networks to the sponsors, anyone.

And all it takes to avoid it is a bit of common sense and pragmatism.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:04 am**

"The truth hurts, man."

It does.
When someone you respected before, after years of respecting him, continually doubles down on baseless racist accusations then tries to explain world history to you trying to prove his point, instead of maybe PM'ing and saying that he's sorry, it makes you think, well, not gonna bother with this guy anymore, which yes, kinda hurts.

So it goes.
We all make our beds ( clearly i've made mine in your eyes, and vice versa ).

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:11 am**

pdub wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2020 11:04 am "The truth hurts, man."

It does.
When someone you respected before continually doubles down on baseless racist accusations then tries to explain world history to you trying to prove his point, instead of maybe PM'ing and saying that he's sorry, it makes you think, well, not gonna bother with this guy anymore, which yes, kinda hurts.

I've never accused you of being racist. I don't believe you are racist (think I've said it, too).

I believe you are a good guy (and, to be clear, not racist!), but you've found yourself in a corner: what you seem so badly to want simply would mean fewer kids from bad backgrounds would get an education through playing college basketball.

There's just no way around it.

Other than conceding that, yeah, maybe it makes sense on every level to make it so that, taken in the aggregate (along with all the cool shit about playing college basketball), getting an education through playing college basketball is a rational economic choice for most/all prospects, not just those with an economic head start.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:14 am**

Ah, OK, not accusing, just inferring indirectly by explaining what slavery and indentured servitude was in case, you know, I never learned that in school.

Meh.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:24 am**

If you took there to be a racial connotation in the reference to indentured servants, then you should refresh your learning on the history of indentured servitude in the US.

The parallel was (quite intentionally) drawn to exploitation of underprivileged people. The parallel has nothing to do with race.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:30 am**

Foed.
And my first!
Congrats Fish.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:39 am**

the real question, is how long jfish and pdub are going to continue this discussion/argument

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:50 am**

No more arguments between us.
We good.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 9:58 pm**

so, first, i fully admit i didn't read the first 67 pages here... but i'm having trouble cobbling together what jfish is arguing. if player #1 goes g league, he has a job/starts working. isn't that the goal of getting a college education in the first place, and arguably better for everyone (its better for #1 and #2, right)?

but maybe i'm off base. if so just ignore; wouldn't do any good to try and catch me up at this point...

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2020 11:36 pm**

jfish26 wrote: "Amateurism," as applied in the modern economy, really does echo indentured servitude from the 1600s

Oh wow. No, and quite frankly thats insulting to those who were servants.

Get a free education. Strength training, meal plan, cook, tutors, terrific living arrangements, the beat teacher in the world to hone my craft, and pussy on call. But dammit, didnt get paid for that photoshoot. Sounds exactly the same as indentured servitude........

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 5:19 am**

Ok....so snowballing off TDub, just to move this in a slightly different direction....so let's say photoshoots and commercials etc. stay banned...why shouldn't the players be allowed to get consumer loans from banks? The ncaa doesn't need to protect big banks. If a bank wants to make a loan to a player based on their future earnings potential then shouldn't that at least be allowed? We do it all the time for future doctors and other professionals. And that avoids the "car dealership A" is paying too much for commercials, because banks have federal regulations they have to follow. They can't just run around making bad/high risk loans otherwise their FDIC exams will not go well.

Regular students get loans all the time for any number of reasons. At some point, and imo that point has far been passed, the ncaa is overreaching their authority on things they should have no control/influence over.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 8:52 am**

IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 5:19 am Ok....so snowballing off TDub, just to move this in a slightly different direction....so let's say photoshoots and commercials etc. stay banned...why shouldn't the players be allowed to get consumer loans from banks? The ncaa doesn't need to protect big banks. If a bank wants to make a loan to a player based on their future earnings potential then shouldn't that at least be allowed? We do it all the time for future doctors and other professionals. And that avoids the "car dealership A" is paying too much for commercials, because banks have federal regulations they have to follow. They can't just run around making bad/high risk loans otherwise their FDIC exams will not go well.

Regular students get loans all the time for any number of reasons. At some point, and imo that point has far been passed, the ncaa is overreaching their authority on things they should have no control/influence over.

The obvious counterpoint - why should players have to borrow money that the market says they should just earn as income? It's not hard to imagine what results from players borrowing money and then fizzling out as players, etc.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 10:45 am**

well, in a sense, that would be the best way to treat ath-o-letes like every other student: just let 'em rack up crippling amounts of debt!

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 11:03 am**

You should be able to earn money and take out loans. Problem solved.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 11:04 am**

...but what if a player suffers a career-changing injury while still playing for free?

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2020 11:16 am**

ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2020 11:04 am ...but what if a player suffers a career-changing injury while still playing for free?

Like most other loans you can’t repay, you declare bankruptcy or refinance. Hopefully nobody co-signed. It’s no worse than the current situation with college financing.

Kansas Crimson

F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA

Re: F the NCAA