More shenanigans - SEC players received cash from agents

[UrinalCake]

Yahoo Sports reports that a former Alabama players served as a middleman, funneling cash from agents to players at multiple SEC schools.

link (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf--ties-between-former-alabama-player-and-agents-documented-by-text-messages-203153323.html)

[FerryFor50]

Gee, is there a correlation between how the SEC is so good at football every year and paying players? :rolleyes:

[lotusland]

It seems like the curtain is being thrown open to reveal the idea of amateurism and student athletes in big-time college sports as a complete farce with all the apparent infractions recently including, Miami, UNC, Texas A&M, OK State and, of course, the SEC. I have to believe the infractions that come to light are just the tip of the ice-burg. I know the truth is supposed to set you free but I'm afraid it's going to bring about significant changes for the worse. I guess I was happier with the façade in tact.

[brevity]

I know the truth is supposed to set you free but I'm afraid it's going to bring about significant changes for the worse. I guess I was happier with the façade in tact.

Not having an emotional attachment to college football, I see it the opposite way. The façade of proper amateur play is what separates honest teams from the NFL minor league here in the Deep South. Tear it all down! May all infractions come to light and break out the asterisk sticker sheets for the record books.

[Duvall]

Not having an emotional attachment to college football, I see it the opposite way. The façade of proper amateur play is what separates honest teams from the NFL minor league here in the Deep South. Tear it all down! May all infractions come to light and break out the asterisk sticker sheets for the record books.

Except that tearing down the façade is more likely to result in more teams moving towards the NFL minor league model. If everyone is cheating, then why should anyone bother doing anything else?

[Chicago 1995]

Gee, is there a correlation between how the SEC is so good at football every year and paying players? :rolleyes:

Things like agent involvement such as alleged here happen everyplace, not just in the SEC.

There are very few clean hands and not many high horses to get on.

[matt1]

I honestly believe that every big-time basketball and football program, even Duke, has MAJOR recruiting violations, but I don't care. College athletes should be paid as the market allows.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

I honestly believe that every big-time basketball and football program, even Duke, has MAJOR recruiting violations, but I don't care. College athletes should be paid as the market allows.
Sorry, but that's a borderline ridiculous statement. What makes you "believe" that every program including Duke is guilty of "MAJOR" violations?

[hurleyfor3]

Whoa, SEC schools cheat? You know what else I heard? Apparently baseball players take steroids!

[matt1]

Sorry, but that's a borderline ridiculous statement. What makes you "believe" that every program including Duke is guilty of "MAJOR" violations?

I think that some schools may not be intentionally cheating, but I do believe that someone is paying these athletes. The NCAA makes so much off them that it would be sad if my suspicions are not true. For the record, I think that it is just something that we should look away from, just like performance-enhancing drugs, as both will happen regardless of regulation and only some will get caught.

[Bob Green]

For the record, I think that it is just something that we should look away from, just like performance-enhancing drugs, as both will happen regardless of regulation and only some will get caught.

I'm flabbergasted by this post. We should look away because "...only some will get caught" is a mind numbing philosophy. I guess we should look away from speeding, drug dealing, breaking and entering, armed robbery, rape and murder.

Wow!

[matt1]

I'm flabbergasted by this post. We should look away because "...only some will get caught" is a mind numbing philosophy. I guess we should look away from speeding, drug dealing, breaking and entering, armed robbery, rape and murder.

Wow!

There is a big difference between those crimes and getting paid to play a sport. I think that schools should be allowed to pay their athletes whatever the market dictates.

[Newton_14]

It seems like the curtain is being thrown open to reveal the idea of amateurism and student athletes in big-time college sports as a complete farce with all the apparent infractions recently including, Miami, UNC, Texas A&M, OK State and, of course, the SEC. I have to believe the infractions that come to light are just the tip of the ice-burg. I know the truth is supposed to set you free but I'm afraid it's going to bring about significant changes for the worse. I guess I was happier with the façade in tact.

Not picking on you directly here so please do not take it that way. Lots of people including our own Jay Bilas play the "amateurism" card every time this comes up. I just don't get it. That never enters my mind when I see allegations on this.

To me, the "amateurism rule" only means (or should only mean) one thing. In Football, a guy can't skip college, go play in the NFL, or Canadian League, or Arena League, or NFL Europe, quit for whatever reason after a couple/few years or so, and then decide to enroll in College and play College Football. Same for hoops. Can't go play in the NBA, D League, or any International League, then try to go enroll in College to play College Hoops. They are no longer "amateurs" because they have now played that sport in a Professional League drawing a salary, and thus forfeited their right to play that sport in college. That should be the only NCAA rule related to "amateurism", period.

A booster or agent giving money to a college or High School/AAU player, does not make the kid a "professional" in any definition of the word in my book. That is called an "illegal benefit". Still punishable of course, but it's absurd to refer to that as something related to amateurism. Makes zero sense to me.

I also think that the idea that "everybody is paying players" is offbase. I think on the whole, across all NCAA schools, the percentage is still low. I also think that a very large percentage of college athlete's actually go to real classes, with real professors, and do real classwork and receive legitimate grades.

That said, stopping agents from giving these kids money under the table is practically impossible to police.

I just hate it for the schools and kids that are doing things the right way as ultimately their world will get destroyed by the sins of others.

[mgtr]

There is a big difference between those crimes and getting paid to play a sport. I think that schools should be allowed to pay their athletes whatever the market dictates.

So whichever school has the most money (and is willing to spend it) wins. Great system!

[jipops]

I (and many on this board) am not a big fan of Gottlieb, but he writes a very good article here...

paying athletes (http://www.cbssports.com/general/writer/doug-gottlieb/23563181/on-manziel-time-magazine-and-entitlement-among-college-players)

seems pertinent here

[arnie]

There is a big difference between those crimes and getting paid to play a sport. I think that schools should be allowed to pay their athletes whatever the market dictates.

A truly sad post. If it comes to that, I and I suspect most Duke fans, would have no interest in our school being a part of NCAA sports.

[lotusland]

Not picking on you directly here so please do not take it that way. Lots of people including our own Jay Bilas play the "amateurism" card every time this comes up. I just don't get it. That never enters my mind when I see allegations on this.

To me, the "amateurism rule" only means (or should only mean) one thing. In Football, a guy can't skip college, go play in the NFL, or Canadian League, or Arena League, or NFL Europe, quit for whatever reason after a couple/few years or so, and then decide to enroll in College and play College Football. Same for hoops. Can't go play in the NBA, D League, or any International League, then try to go enroll in College to play College Hoops. They are no longer "amateurs" because they have now played that sport in a Professional League drawing a salary, and thus forfeited their right to play that sport in college. That should be the only NCAA rule related to "amateurism", period.

A booster or agent giving money to a college or High School/AAU player, does not make the kid a "professional" in any definition of the word in my book. That is called an "illegal benefit". Still punishable of course, but it's absurd to refer to that as something related to amateurism. Makes zero sense to me.



Well that sounds like some pretty impressive mental gymnastics in my book. I've always understood "professional" to mean getting paid for it. I can't really follow the "amateurism refers to getting paid in the past not today" line of reasoning and I'm totally baffled by the "gifts from boosters and agents are illegal benefits not pay" theory. For simplification I'm just going to stick with my current understanding of amateurism meaning both that you don't get paid now and you haven't been paid in the past.

[lotusland]

A truly sad post. If it comes to that, I and I suspect most Duke fans, would have no interest in our school being a part of NCAA sports.

An interesting thought but I'm not so sure. However, for the sake of argument, let's say the courts decide that athletes in revenue sports must be compensated according to their market value. Wouldn't there have to be some definition of what level of revenue dictates pay? For instance, would division II players be able to market themselves if their anyone was willing to pay?

Let's say for example that the ACC and Big 10 schools decide that the professional model just doesn't fit their overall mission so they decide to bow out and only compete at the "non-revenue" level whatever that is. Meanwhile the BIG and SEC decide to go full speed ahead with professional model where football and basketball players can get paid as much as the agents and boosters can rake together and there is no longer a pretense that the athletes are also students.

I predict that, before long, the "pay for play" leagues would die from lack interest and eventually their league championships would become practically meaningless and those schools and their fans would be begging to get back in the "amateur" league. Furthermore I bet many top athletes would choose to play in the amateur league and get real college degrees instead of whatever bling they could pick up in the pay league.

The tricky part, in my mind, would be maintaining the amateur designation according to whatever definition is established in the face of rabid interest in the games. The sucky part would be that there probably couldn't be TV contacts for the amateur schools and/or conferences so I couldn't watch any of the games on ESPN.

If such an experiment were allowed to happen I believe that fans would overwhelmingly choose amateur college sports over pay for play. In fact the pay for play leagues would experience such a void of interest that the player's "market value" would be almost nil. Not that I think that scenario would ever play out but I would love to see some blue blood schools bow out to see how those who were left behind would react. If Duke played Carolina and only student tickets could be sold and the game was only broadcast on the radio it would still be the lead story on Sportscenter that night.

[sagegrouse]

There is a big difference between those crimes and getting paid to play a sport. I think that schools should be allowed to pay their athletes whatever the market dictates.


I honestly believe that every big-time basketball and football program, even Duke, has MAJOR recruiting violations, but I don't care. College athletes should be paid as the market allows.

The NCAA is a consortium of schools that agree to compete under certain rules. Athletes not getting paid in cash by schools or boosters is one of the rules. Breaking the rules is wrong, dishonorable, and fully worthy of both scorn and penalties. Anyone disagree?

In an alternate universe there may be different provisions about compensation for athletes -- such as relatively small monthly payments or some rights to earn money, probably deferred and shared with teammates, for the use of the athletes' own images. I can imagine that happening.

A completely free market for hiring and paying athletes in college ain't in the cards, nor IMHO (where the H is silent) should it be. A Wild West approach to bidding for and paying players would certainly make college competition less fair and more gladatorial. Even professional leagues have salary caps and restrictions on what players are paid.

And, no, college athletes do not have a constitutional right to get paid cash for their participation or accomplishments as college athletes. And, yes, the NCAA has the legal right to set the terms for participation in college athletics, as agreed to by the member schools. The NCAA rules result in "college athletes getting paid as the [NCAA] market allows." And starting with a premise that an individual athlete should be free to sell himself to the highest bidder is not a very useful point of departure for analyzing college athletics. it's a good bumper sticker, but not a good foundation. At the same time there are equities in terms of athletes not surrendering rights to their images to the colleges, and so forth. I could go on (and on... and on....).

sagegrouse

[ForkFondler]

So whichever school has the most money (and is willing to spend it) wins. Great system!

Well, it works that way anyway to a large extent. Building lavish facilities just for athletes seems to be AOK by all accounts.

To me, the main travesty is that the many of the athletes are NOT also students. UNC is the poster child for that.

As far as money goes, I fail to see why letting the school pay the players is preferable to letting the athletes get paid by someone else.

On both counts, the NCAA is a farce.

[moonpie23]

i think it's jumped the shark......the NCAA is overwhelmed, under staffed, misdirected, confused and inept.......

it's over for them......


new world is coming......well, transparent world....lol

[PSurprise]

So obviously this must mean that money makes one a better football player. Maybe I should have gotten money to go to my Econ classes. I probably would have done better! :)

[OldPhiKap]

So obviously this must mean that money makes one a better football player. Maybe I should have gotten money to go to my Econ classes. I probably would have done better! :)

I would have done better at Duke if they paid me to attend, instead of me paying to go there.

[ricks68]

I would have done better at Duke if they paid me to attend, instead of me paying to go there.

Well, I know for sure that I would have done better because it would have been nigh impossible for me to have done any worse! Seriously.:o

ricks

[lotusland]

Well, I know for sure that I would have done better because it would have been nigh impossible for me to have done any worse! Seriously.:o

ricks

We're pretty far off topic now but...I did not attend Duke and my first year of college was paid through a mixture of scholarships and student loans which, at that age, did not seem like real money to me and I basically wasted the whole year as far as grades and credits go. I sat out a semester and came back with "my money" that I had saved from loading boxes for UPS while sitting out. I was definitely more motivated to not waste my money than someone else's. I'm not sure how that relates to paying players vs. providing a scholarship though.

[Des Esseintes]

i think it's jumped the shark......the NCAA is overwhelmed, under staffed, misdirected, confused and inept.......

it's over for them......


new world is coming......well, transparent world....lol

I really don't see how a bunch of SEC players on the agent's dole is the fault of the NCAA.

[g-money]

i think it's jumped the shark......the NCAA is overwhelmed, under staffed, misdirected, confused and inept.......

it's over for them......


new world is coming......well, transparent world....lol


I really don't see how a bunch of SEC players on the agent's dole is the fault of the NCAA.

I think maybe moonpie23 is forecasting that the NCAA won't do anything about this new revelation. To his/her point, has the NCAA done anything of note since the Penn State smackdown? Punchline: Oh yeah, that's right, they suspended Johnny Manziel for a half against Rice.

The NCAA seems to be paralyzed by the sheer number of scandals on its hands and poor management. It's the perfect time to cheat if you're an NCAA coach or player with questionable ethics. The cops are eating donuts.