Kansas Crimson

No Count Dokoo is not nearly as legendary as Darth Vader, JFish. We know you think he looks cool with his new lightsaber and the new special effects have lots of droid armies blasting things but no, we just don’t like it.

And yea we aren’t super confident in the next one. Yes we know Hayden. Christianson is actually Darth Vader. Yes we have heard how it was just a long time coming and inevitable that they had to “finish the story” and that it’s all going to come to a masterful epic finish.

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 7:08 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:41 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:13 pm It’s the eve of the night before Final Four and the biggest news on ESPN is about how Edey isn’t able to make enough NIL money.

Transitional period is the time before colleges have salary caps and contacts and pay players directly? And then it’ll all be good?

Can we seriously stop calling it CBB too? It’s not college basketball. We need a new term. Can we call it the NBDL?

My opinion remains that the part of all of this that has the most significant negative effect on the sport itself (and the games themselves) is the wildness of the portal, and the money is gasoline on the fire. And that the wildness of the portal is going to calm down.

I respect that there are those for whom even the money on its own is ruining the sport. That is not an opinion I share, and so I think the sport will find a very good level once there is some more order and sanity around roster upheaval.

how does it find a "level" without contracts and players unions, salary caps, etc. Thus, eliminating every aspect of collegiate sports in the process?

I don’t have a great feel for how the specific mechanics will shake out, given the inherently transient nature of the labor pool.

But that’s not really your question, and all I can really say is that we feel very differently about whether moving a meaningful portion of the money in the system directly and transparently to the players will ruin what each of us loves about college sports.

And I really hope that the transfer stuff calms down, and that people who are dissatisfied with all of this will end up not hating it quite as much as they do/expect.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Sat Apr 06, 2024 12:10 am

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 7:08 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:41 pm

My opinion remains that the part of all of this that has the most significant negative effect on the sport itself (and the games themselves) is the wildness of the portal, and the money is gasoline on the fire. And that the wildness of the portal is going to calm down.

I respect that there are those for whom even the money on its own is ruining the sport. That is not an opinion I share, and so I think the sport will find a very good level once there is some more order and sanity around roster upheaval.

how does it find a "level" without contracts and players unions, salary caps, etc. Thus, eliminating every aspect of collegiate sports in the process?

I don’t have a great feel for how the specific mechanics will shake out, given the inherently transient nature of the labor pool.

But that’s not really your question, and all I can really say is that we feel very differently about whether moving a meaningful portion of the money in the system directly and transparently to the players will ruin what each of us loves about college sports.

And I really hope that the transfer stuff calms down, and that people who are dissatisfied with all of this will end up not hating it quite as much as they do/expect.

yea I mean...I guess for me, salaries, salary caps, contracts, free agency, union fights etc are the least interesting and worst part of sports. If I cared about that stuff I'd follow professional leagues. NOT having that stuff, and having the representation of a university and a drive to improve in order for a shot at making the big leagues (and the money that comes with that) being the main focus for amateur athletics is what made college sports special (to me). I feel like that's gone and, essentially at this point, cannot return.

college has become pro. Maybe high school will become what college was.

Probably not. I am already hearing rumblings of nil in high school sports.

MICHHAWK wrote: ↑Sat Apr 06, 2024 9:45 am college has become pro. Maybe high school will become what college was.

Probably not. I am already hearing rumblings of nil in high school sports.

Maybe high school will become what college was?
High School has been what college was for the last 40+ years.

https://www.espn.com/college-football/s ... ligibility

"One of the questions we have to ask ourselves is, at what point does the degree still matter?" Oregon coach Dan Lanning told ESPN in a recent interview..."...if somebody's changing schools three times, I'm wondering what their progress towards a degree really looks like. I think that's something everyone should probably have some awareness of."

skool lolz

might as well outlaw the one-and-dones, too

how many non-student athlete college kids change schools?

More than once?
I’m guessing not a lot.
This of course is not the point anymore since they are being paid like professionals and not students.

https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bas ... basketball

"If you want to kill it, then let the kids leave after freshman year," Auriemma said. "On the men's side, it's become transactional. Everybody's a free agent. Everybody's a mercenary. It's not the kids' fault. ... To me, what helped the women's game grow is the people in Iowa got to grow up with Caitlin Clark. The people of Connecticut got to grow up with all of my great players. There's something to be said for that."

He is correct.

ok, but in the interest of self-preservation...

I think more than simply growing up with Caitlin Clark, what helped even more yet was Caitlin Clark playing like the Steph Curry of the women’s game

pdub wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 2:12 pm https://www.espn.com/womens-college-bas ... basketball

"If you want to kill it, then let the kids leave after freshman year," Auriemma said. "On the men's side, it's become transactional. Everybody's a free agent. Everybody's a mercenary. It's not the kids' fault. ... To me, what helped the women's game grow is the people in Iowa got to grow up with Caitlin Clark. The people of Connecticut got to grow up with all of my great players. There's something to be said for that."

He is correct.

I would absolutely agree that the present state of player movement is not, in the year-to-year sense, good for men's college basketball.

none of anything that has happened in the past 4 or 5 years is good for the college game.

The counter here will be it was inevitable and was already happening, the first of which is nonsense and the second is barely a part truth.

At this point the power schools just take their money making sportsballs ( football and basketball ), form a league ( contracts, trades and all ) and stop calling it college sports. It's not college sports. They of course won't do that because they'll loose their core audience and brand which brought college sports attention in the first place.

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:12 am none of anything that has happened in the past 4 or 5 years is good for the college game.

The players disagree.

Hell ya.

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/sto ... am-memphis

Change the Memphis Tigers to the Memphis Fed Ex.
Maybe the mascot can be a shipping box or something.

I am not bothered that Kj Adams can do a Raisin' Cane's commercial.

I am not bothered that people can transfer freely year to year. I don't see why them sitting out for a year makes it any more tolerable? Because they get what is viewed as "punished"?

I think the kids who are transferring non stop are making mistakes in many instances. I'm not a fan of it, personally. I think in some instances they'd be better served staying put. But that's their choice to make and they should be allowed to make it.

We aren't forced to recruit any of those types of players. Bill Self gets paid a ridiculous amount of money to make those decisions. He is paid to identify the players who are willing to play whatever role he ends up giving that player. If the roster turnover becomes a problem, which it has been recently, then I blame him.

I don't think these players should be handcuffed to the schools. The schools certainly aren't handcuffed to the players.

DeletedUser wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 10:23 am

TDub wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:12 am none of anything that has happened in the past 4 or 5 years is good for the college game.

The players disagree.

Not the players who now have a much higher chance of getting forced out.