PDA

View Full Version : Wendell Carter's Mother Is Angry



Pages : [1] 2

hallcity
05-07-2018, 02:56 PM
From ESPN (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/23434636/former-duke-basketball-star-wendell-carter-mother-likens-ncaa-system-slavery):

In an emotional address on Monday at a meeting of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, Kylia Carter, mother of former Duke basketball star Wendell Carter, compared the current system of NCAA basketball to slavery and a prison system.

"When you remove all the bling and the bells and the sneakers and all that," she said, "you've paid for a child to come to your school to do what you wanted them to do for you, for free, and you made a lot of money when he did that, and you've got all these rules in place that say he cannot share in any of that. The only other time when labor does not get paid but yet someone else gets profits and the labor is black and the profit is white, is in slavery.

Colleges offer what they offer. Carter and his parents knew the deal coming in. If you don't like the deal, don't take it. If they genuinely regarded it as slavery, they could have opted out by negotiating a contract to play overseas. They didn't choose that option. Her anger is being directed at the NCAA but the problem is that the NBA won't offer contracts to 18 year olds and they're afraid to play overseas.

If you're the NCAA, try designing a system to pay players. Sure, Duke can afford to pay players but can ECU or Elon? There are far, far more ECUs and Elons in the world than Dukes. How do you have a competition where some schools can afford to pay players and others can't? If you do pay players, do Wendell Carter and Antonio Vrankovich get paid the same amount? I'm pretty sure that Mrs. Carter would believe that her son was still being ripped off if that were the case. What should we have -- open bidding for the services of HS seniors or, perhaps, a draft of HS players? The fact is that for the vast majority of college basketball players, a scholarship is a good deal. I don't see changing the whole system in order to accommodate a handful of players each year.

Matches
05-07-2018, 03:05 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatment_of_slaves_in_the_United_States

Nope. Sorry. No love here for the NCAA or the OAD rule but comparisons like this are... not smart.

We all (deservedly) mocked Roy Williams for his comments about Haiti. No interest in mocking a Duke player's mom but this is largely the same thing.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-07-2018, 03:06 PM
From Sure, Duke can afford to pay players but can ECU or Elon? .

Neither can Duke, when you throw in the football team as well as the basketball team......and if hoops players get paid, so will football players. And the non revs will try as well.

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 03:08 PM
It's difficult to take this type of diatribe seriously. I feel badly saying this because Wendell seemed like a great kid and, by all accounts, is a good student. The casual comparison of something, here college basketball, to slavery is terrible and should be insulting to anyone who has experienced or even studied slavery.

I am in favor of kids going straight from high school to the NBA. However, I am offended by her notion that Wendell's year at Duke, with a great education, great medical assistance, television exposure, and a great coach is in anyway comparable to slavery or indentured servitude.

I'm not going to restate all the obvious arguments about the choices Wendell had.

I'm a little angry at this and will resist further comment.

weezie
05-07-2018, 03:13 PM
...and if hoops players get paid, so will football players. And the non revs will try as well.

And then, how much based on what? Gross income, ticket sales, apparel sales/team, ad revenue, or more similar to an on campus job in Perkins?

Geesh, it's dog chasing tail season. Round and round and round.

cato
05-07-2018, 03:22 PM
If they genuinely regarded it as slavery, they could have opted out by negotiating a contract to play overseas. They didn't choose that option.

Ugh.

They chose the clear best option for Wendell. Sorry it makes you uncomfortable for Wendell’s mom to point out some problems with that option.

gocanes0506
05-07-2018, 03:22 PM
Sometimes kids have to tell their parents they are ruining their life and truly mean it. This is one of those cases. If I am a GM, I avoid overbearing parents like her and Ball. Ball more so but in the end I wouldnt want her either. Is she going to cause me grief as I do the responsible thing and offer her son a contract that is beneficial to the organization? That contract offer may be market value but will it be enough value for her baby boy? I wouldnt want to find out. Would she relate my organization, my owner, or me as some slave owner? IDK, but I wouldnt want to find out.

In the end, the NCAA is far from slavery and it is sad that she is allowed to say those things. Is it equal pay to work, no. What organization any where gives you equal pay to service rendered? NFL players work for a 7 billion dollar organization. Outside of QBs, none make worth service rendered. When I was a production supervisor, my guys filled up a 55 gallon drum that sold for thousand dollars or so. They made ~20 dollars an hour.

If she wished to call it unfair, okay I can give you that. The NCAA has made a stupid amount of money lately. To call it slavery, that is more unfair to slaves than the NCAA is to the players. Sadly enough, Duke's name will be associated with her ridiculousness for eternity.

UrinalCake
05-07-2018, 03:27 PM
Ageee that comparing it to slavery is going too far; nobody forced Wendell to come to duke and play. I can understand the frustrations of players who feel they are being exploited, but the analogy is ill-fitting. I remember when Rashaad McCants said that playing for UNC was like being in prison and we all had a good laugh at that.

Still, I am glad she is speaking up and saying what many feel yet do not say. The system obviously needs reform and change will only come about by people being willing to take risks and challenge the norm.

SueAxe
05-07-2018, 03:28 PM
I actually enjoyed hearing what she had to say. Is it over the top? Sure although I don't think Kylia was really suggesting that playing at Duke was like being in prison or being a slave. But her point is well taken. The sport is largely comprised of African-American athletes, many of whom have the potential to earn millions, and they are treated poorly and deprived of cashing on. They can't profit from their own likenesses, while the NCAA runs all sorts of ads using film of them playing. They can't sign with agents and yet, they have a lot of the downside of celebrity, like being the subject of twitter fire and facebook attacks (like Wendell's name being in an agent's ledger). I liked her point that they are told that they are getting paid in a free education even though that is not the currency of their choosing. It is a bad look for the NCAA. With money awash in high school/college basketball and none of it legitimately going to the very entities that make the game so lucrative, ie the players, it is simply disgusting that there will be no meaningful reforms. Could Wendell have gone to Europe, sure, but really why should he have to. This system breeds corruption and needs to change. I love seeing someone call out the hypocrisy.

uh_no
05-07-2018, 03:38 PM
Neither can Duke, when you throw in the football team as well as the basketball team...and if hoops players get paid, so will football players. And the non revs will try as well.

not only will they try, but they have to be. title IX. every dime spent on a male athlete must have an equivalent spent on a female.

arnie
05-07-2018, 03:44 PM
Ageee that comparing it to slavery is going too far; nobody forced Wendell to come to duke and play. I can understand the frustrations of players who feel they are being exploited, but the analogy is ill-fitting. I remember when Rashaad McCants said that playing for UNC was like being in prison and we all had a good laugh at that.

Still, I am glad she is speaking up and saying what many feel yet do not say. The system obviously needs reform and change will only come about by people being willing to take risks and challenge the norm.

Comparing Wendell’s 9-month plight at Duke to slavery is horrible and makes a mockery of actual slavery. No excuse for her comments.

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 03:48 PM
I actually enjoyed hearing what she had to say. Is it over the top? Sure although I don't think Kylia was really suggesting that playing at Duke was like being in prison or being a slave. But her point is well taken. The sport is largely comprised of African-American athletes, many of whom have the potential to earn millions, and they are treated poorly and deprived of cashing on. They can't profit from their own likenesses, while the NCAA runs all sorts of ads using film of them playing. They can't sign with agents and yet, they have a lot of the downside of celebrity, like being the subject of twitter fire and facebook attacks (like Wendell's name being in an agent's ledger). I liked her point that they are told that they are getting paid in a free education even though that is not the currency of their choosing. It is a bad look for the NCAA. With money awash in high school/college basketball and none of it legitimately going to the very entities that make the game so lucrative, ie the players, it is simply disgusting that there will be no meaningful reforms. Could Wendell have gone to Europe, sure, but really why should he have to. This system breeds corruption and needs to change. I love seeing someone call out the hypocrisy.

Do you see any hypocrisy, faulty logic, or self interest in Wendell's mother's statements?

DukieInBrasil
05-07-2018, 03:51 PM
Ugh.

They chose the clear best option for Wendell. Sorry it makes you uncomfortable for Wendell’s mom to point out some problems with that option.

she didn't just point out some problems, she made a horribly over-the-top comparison that is hugely insulting to anyone who has even a passing understanding of reality.

chrishoke
05-07-2018, 03:55 PM
not only will they try, but they have to be. title IX. every dime spent on a male athlete must have an equivalent spent on a female.

Mere details that should never get in ythe way of a good rant.

CameronBornAndBred
05-07-2018, 04:04 PM
You can't say those words, and also say your son should go back to Duke before he declared. One of them turns out to be disingenuous, and it's pretty obvious which one that is.
Very disheartening comments.

flyingdutchdevil
05-07-2018, 04:06 PM
Yeah, the analogy went too far. But she's creating headlines. And she's right that the NCAA is a horrible organization.

GO MRS. CARTER!!!

chrishoke
05-07-2018, 04:12 PM
Is she yelling at the NCAA or Coach K, or both? K is white and making a ton of money.

ncexnyc
05-07-2018, 04:19 PM
So we're back on this topic. :mad: Yeah, let's retool a system that works just fine for several thousand players just to make the Golden Boys of the sport happy.

I'm sorry these kids dislike the options available to them, but that's often how it is in life. Time for them to learn a cold, hard lesson that many of them seem to have never faced while growing up.

Bluedog
05-07-2018, 04:19 PM
But her point is well taken[...][NCAA basketball athletes] are treated poorly

Uh, what? I would LOVE for my son or daughter to be "treated poorly" by being able to attend and be a part of Duke's basketball program on a full-ride scholarhip with an insane amount of perks and amazing connections for life. They are treated like KINGS. Yes, you could obviously argue that they are not being paid market rate, but to say they're "treated poorly" is ridiculous. All this "woe is me" talk makes me think that the NCAA should just kill sports (and then only the students that get in on ACADEMIC merit could join club teams) and then we'll see how top basketball players really feel with their options remaining. But it'd be a shame because it only applies to like 15 guys a year and everybody else would be collateral damage. Being so over the top and comparing it to slavery is totally counter-productive to what they're trying to achieve. It's an absolute joke and frankly makes me angry. I love Duke sports and basketball in particular, but sadly all the recent happenings have dampered my enthusiasm for sure.

kako
05-07-2018, 04:23 PM
I can overlook her over-the-top analogy (which I am guessing the media reports are pushing to even further sensationalize their pieces) since she is calling out the NCAA, which I am hoping most people agree needs reform. Anything that digs into the NCAA is OK with me because I think they deserve a lot of flak.

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 04:27 PM
I can overlook her over-the-top analogy (which I am guessing the media reports are pushing to even further sensationalize their pieces) since she is calling out the NCAA, which I am hoping most people agree needs reform. Anything that digs into the NCAA is OK with me because I think they deserve a lot of flak.

Yeah, but over-the-top anologies can be harmful and false. Coach K was not a slave master, Wendell was not a slave. It is offensive and false. It doesn't further any reasonable discussion on the issues.

dudog84
05-07-2018, 04:29 PM
Always idiotic to compare any situation or people to slavery or Nazis. Unless it's slavery or Nazis.

I'm getting tired of these parents. I've always considered being born in the United States as winning the birth lottery (yes, we can always make the country better but we have a pretty good baseline). These parents have won the reverse-birth lottery. They're going to be rich because one of their children has a special skill, but we see 99% of their siblings don't have it, let alone all the other kids on the planet.

I miss the days when Coach K would tell these parents to pound salt (Kris Humphries, anyone?). Though she is likely nothing like his dad was, and Wendell's apparently such a great kid that it was worth it to him. We don't know her, but another poster was right to point out the disingenuousness of her recent utterances.

Look, I know she cares about her kid, but she's not doing him any favors. And the NCAA stinks but this is fully the NBA's fault. But in their defense, it's their league and they can set the rules however they want. All companies have rules and requirements about who they will employ. Would IBM have hired Bill Gates without a college degree? Probably not, but he was free to start his own business. Her son had options, he chose the best.

sagegrouse
05-07-2018, 04:35 PM
I am sorry, Mrs. Carter, but what does this have to do with intercollegiate athletics? It's 100 percent the NBA. The NBA does not allow players to enter the league until one year after HS graduation. Wendell could play any place on earth except the NBA and take whatever is offered as salary. As it turns out, the colleges offer the exact same deal to every athlete -- free education and some stipends in return for joining an athletic team. Why are the NCAA and the colleges at fault?

flyingdutchdevil
05-07-2018, 04:39 PM
I am sorry, Mrs. Carter, but what does this have to do with intercollegiate athletics? It's 100 percent the NBA. The NBA does not allow players to enter the league until one year after HS graduation. Wendell could play any place on earth except the NBA and take whatever is offered as salary. As it turns out, the colleges offer the exact same deal to every athlete -- free education and some stipends in return for joining an athletic team. Why are the NCAA and the colleges at fault?

Because the NCAA markets itself as a non-profit that makes billions for its member programs? Because the NCAA has the dumbest rules in the world for its most important assets (the athletes themselves)? Because kids always feel like they're being manipulated and abused by an organization intended to protect and guide them?

The NBA is looking out for itself and its members. The NCAA only looks for the best ways to make their member schools money.

dudog84
05-07-2018, 04:43 PM
Because the NCAA markets itself as a non-profit that makes billions for its member programs? Because the NCAA has the dumbest rules in the world for its most important assets (the athletes themselves)? Because kids always feel like they're being manipulated and abused by an organization intended to protect and guide them?

The NBA is looking out for itself and its members. The NCAA only looks for the best ways to make their member schools money.

Are you anti-capitalist? (yes, I am ducking...but I'm also more than a bit serious)

CrazyNotCrazie
05-07-2018, 04:43 PM
Sometimes kids have to tell their parents they are ruining their life and truly mean it. This is one of those cases. If I am a GM, I avoid overbearing parents like her and Ball. Ball more so but in the end I wouldnt want her either. Is she going to cause me grief as I do the responsible thing and offer her son a contract that is beneficial to the organization? That contract offer may be market value but will it be enough value for her baby boy? I wouldnt want to find out. Would she relate my organization, my owner, or me as some slave owner? IDK, but I wouldnt want to find out.

In the end, the NCAA is far from slavery and it is sad that she is allowed to say those things. Is it equal pay to work, no. What organization any where gives you equal pay to service rendered? NFL players work for a 7 billion dollar organization. Outside of QBs, none make worth service rendered. When I was a production supervisor, my guys filled up a 55 gallon drum that sold for thousand dollars or so. They made ~20 dollars an hour.

If she wished to call it unfair, okay I can give you that. The NCAA has made a stupid amount of money lately. To call it slavery, that is more unfair to slaves than the NCAA is to the players. Sadly enough, Duke's name will be associated with her ridiculousness for eternity.

Good point. It is ironic that she is clearly focused on maximizing Wendell's earning potential but by being so outspoken and controversial, she is potentially costing him money as some teams might choose to stay away from him. She is far milder than Ball the Buffoon, but would still be best off measuring her words.

Comparing this situation to slavery is ridiculous. I would be thrilled for my kids to have preferential admissions to the college of their choice, a free ride and the opportunity to hobnob with powerful alumni. I would be thrilled to have one of the three of those. Many argue that this is not sufficient compensation (I tend to disagree), but I think everyone agrees this is a non-trivial award.

I wish the media would stop putting a microphone in front of her, but the more she talks, the more attention she will get. Wendell would be wise to tell her to stop talking, at least until after the draft.

flyingdutchdevil
05-07-2018, 04:47 PM
Are you anti-capitalist? (yes, I am ducking...but I'm also more than a bit serious)

I'm incredibly capitalistic. I just hate the idea that the asset generating ALL the value doesn't receive a cent.

ipatent
05-07-2018, 04:54 PM
The sport is largely comprised of African-American athletes, many of whom have the potential to earn millions, and they are treated poorly and deprived of cashing on.

Very few will end up making millions. Even can't miss prospects like Okafor and Greg Oden are not a sure bet for a long term NBA career.

The rest of them are getting a free ride for an education that opens up career paths like HS coaching.

It is an NBA rule that has resulted in the OAD system, not an NCAA rule. The Carters and others chose the best clear path given that rule. Mrs. Carter should direct her frustration at the NBA, not the NCAA. The NCAA will make just as much money without the OADs in the system, as it did in the mid 00s.

dudog84
05-07-2018, 05:11 PM
I'm incredibly capitalistic. I just hate the idea that the asset generating ALL the value doesn't receive a cent.

My point was more 'What do you expect the NCAA to do for it's members?'.

Also, to this comment, there is more to compensation than cents. If Mrs. Carter wants cents (or trunk meat), I hear there is a team in Lithuania looking for players. They just lost a couple last week.

kako
05-07-2018, 05:11 PM
Yeah, but over-the-top anologies can be harmful and false. Coach K was not a slave master, Wendell was not a slave. It is offensive and false. It doesn't further any reasonable discussion on the issues.

I can overlook a reference to slavery (though from what I saw she never called K a slave master). In general if protesters don't do what they do, then the status quo will just try to conduct business as usual. I'm all for the NCAA taking hits, wherever they come from.

9F

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 05:11 PM
Apart from Wendell's mother's comments, that I vigorously disagree with, we get into a recurring loop here. Some think that college kids should be compensated. Others, like me, worked hard to put my kids through college and would have been grateful for a Duke scholarship to help my kids and ease my financial burden.

I lean on the side of looking at Title IX and non revenue sports and wonder how a college can compensate Wendell Carter but not a swimmer, wrestler, female lacrosse player etc. I don't have the answer but it is legally problematic.

I believe in the free market. Let any high school kid declare for the NBA and succeed or suffer the consequences if it doesn't work. I'm tired of people blaming the NCAA and Duke for an NBA rule. For every kid who succeeds in an open market, there are probably two kids who fail. That's not Duke's problem.

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 05:13 PM
I can overlook a reference to slavery (though from what I saw she never called K a slave master). In general if protesters don't do what they do, then the status quo will just try to conduct business as usual. I'm all for the NCAA taking hits, wherever they come from.

9F

You can't be a slave without a slave master, right?

Jeffrey
05-07-2018, 05:13 PM
Wasn't Mrs. Carter the parent who wanted Wendell to return for his sophomore year at Duke?

flyingdutchdevil
05-07-2018, 05:14 PM
Wasn't Mrs. Carter the parent who wanted Wendell to return for his sophomore year at Duke?

Yup. My guess? Mrs Carter loves college for academics. Not for sports.

Can’t say I blame her.

dudog84
05-07-2018, 05:16 PM
Very few will end up making millions. Even can't miss prospects like Okafor and Greg Oden are not a sure bet for a long term NBA career.

The rest of them are getting a free ride for an education that opens up career paths like HS coaching.

It is an NBA rule that has resulted in the OAD system, not an NCAA rule. The Carters and others chose the best clear path given that rule. Mrs. Carter should direct her frustration at the NBA, not the NCAA. The NCAA will make just as much money without the OADs in the system, as it did in the mid 00s.

But if she does that, she'll really start costing her son some money.

...oh, I get it now!

kako
05-07-2018, 05:23 PM
You can't be a slave without a slave master, right?

I think in her view this is the NCAA as a whole. But you'd have to ask her.

I also think to focus on this is ignoring the main point.

duke4ever19
05-07-2018, 05:24 PM
Wasn't she in favor of her son attending Harvard? What, does Harvard basketball not play in the NCAA? Isn't it the same "slave-like" system? Is playing overseas also like slavery? If not, then why didn't you encourage your son to choose something that wasn't so allegedly exploitive?

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 05:26 PM
I think in her view this is the NCAA as a whole. But you'd have to ask her.

I also think to focus on this is ignoring the main point.
An
With all due respect, I disagree. Word have meaning. An allegation of slavery is disturbing, dishonest, and wrong. I'm willing to just agree to disagree on this but these are very serious and wrongheaded allegations.

Jeffrey
05-07-2018, 05:28 PM
I'm incredibly capitalistic. I just hate the idea that the asset generating ALL the value doesn't receive a cent.

K and his staff are worthless?

A Duke education is worthless?

Almost constant game exposure on national television is worthless?

subzero02
05-07-2018, 05:36 PM
i could see comparing it to one year of indentured servitude but even that is quite a stretch.

arnie
05-07-2018, 05:38 PM
K and his staff are worthless?

A Duke education is worthless?

Almost constant game exposure on national television is worthless?

Bingo! If Wendell attended Cheat U and could only take fake classes, she’d have a point (but not the absurd slavery point). But he didn’t go the Cheat direction and I’m certain he had opportunity to learn and receive huge celebrity status.

Jeffrey
05-07-2018, 05:39 PM
Yup. My guess? Mrs Carter loves college for academics. Not for sports.

Can’t say I blame her.

I suspect you're correct. However, if that's the case, then why not recommend Wendell turn pro and take Duke summer classes? Recommending Wendell not turn pro, and calling it slavery, does not compute.

kako
05-07-2018, 05:40 PM
An
With all due respect, I disagree. Word have meaning. An allegation of slavery is disturbing, dishonest, and wrong. I'm willing to just agree to disagree on this but these are very serious and wrongheaded allegations.

Agree to disagree. I will leave this particular point by saying that as there are many ways to view any issue, it's all about one's point of view and on what one chooses to focus.

I'm fine with a total teardown of the NCAA. There's no law that the college system must be a part of it. I was finally done with the NCAA once the UNC decision came down. But I understand it will take time. It takes more than one bullet to bring down a bull moose.

9F

lotusland
05-07-2018, 06:02 PM
I no longer watch pro sports of any kind. I dropped them one by one because they’re just boring and I don’t care about the players, owners, union, shoe companies, etc.. I guess some people will still watch when the shoe companies control where players attend college and those players subsequently have greater allegiance to the shoe company that’s paying them than their school and coaches but I’m fairley sure I’ll lose interest in college-affiliated semi-pro basketball and drop it.

OldPhiKap
05-07-2018, 06:15 PM
Outside of straight-up crazy like LaVar Ball, I defer to the parents of any kid.

If they’re happpy, I am happy for them.
If they’re unhappy, I hope they fight to fix what ails them.

Good luck to Wendell, and to the Carter family.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-07-2018, 06:16 PM
I'm incredibly capitalistic. I just hate the idea that the asset generating ALL the value doesn't receive a cent.

Sorry, but the "asset" you are referring to does not even come close do generating ALL the value as you put it. The value, the revenue, is generated year in and year out by a system that thrived long before these "assets" came into being. If the "assets" were producing the value, they wouldn't need the name on the front of the jersey. Those assets in the G League or whatever would play to packed houses and large TV contracts.

But they don't, and never will. Why? It's the name on the front of the jersey that is ultimately producing the revenues.

rocketeli
05-07-2018, 06:41 PM
All I know is what I read on espn, so I'm very ignorant, but I just can't figure out why this lady thinks that she has such a problem. What is so horrible about earning 75K + out of high school (in terms of tuition, stipend, food, housing, medical care, books, "orange juice money" etc.) having a year of training and teaching by an expert staff in your chosen field, tons of national exposure to improve your brand, all by your own choice, since nobody forced you to do it? You can always take a year off, or play in the G league or go overseas. You can't then argue both that the NCAA sucks and the other options aren't as good! And it's the NBA, not the NCAA, who got tired of paying high school players that didn't pan out/took too long to develop and set the age limit.

What exactly, is it that makes everyone so concerned about the NCAA and it's purported badness, besides the fact that it's human nature to envy those who appear financially more successful than we are? That idiot Jay Bilas? Remember 99% of what the NCAA does has nothing to do with Division I revenue sports. It's a private company that schools are voluntary members of, that provides a framework of consistent rules for playing, refereeing, records, competitions and championships and publicity for about 1000 schools (of which about 300-400 play some kind of Div I sport and about 130 play division I football.) It's certainly not the NCAA's wish that certain members be cheating bastids such that their enforcement/investigative department can get overwhelmed. And remember, how you feel about any one punishment decision has a lot to do with what color glasses you are looking at it through.

As I've posted before, I've come to see college financed sports, especially in this era of big TV contracts, as being a completely insane and inane entity. (So even following them has become a source of conflict for me.) I think schools could be free to have their boosters and alums finance sports clubs with their branding, and club sports at schools would provide plenty of pleasure to true amateurs--basically the European model. But focusing on blaming the NCAA is basically blaming the messenger.

SueAxe
05-07-2018, 06:50 PM
Do you see any hypocrisy, faulty logic, or self interest in Wendell's mother's statements?

https://deadspin.com/kylia-carters-speech-against-the-ncaa-model-got-right-t-1825826893

Here is what she actually said. I think it is a great speech from someone with experiences that make her worth listening to.

MartyClark
05-07-2018, 07:06 PM
https://deadspin.com/kylia-carters-speech-against-the-ncaa-model-got-right-t-1825826893

Here is what she actually said. I think it is a great speech from someone with experiences that make her worth listening to.

Thanks for sharing this. It doesn't change my position but, I think, I understand your position better.

SueAxe
05-07-2018, 07:57 PM
Thanks for sharing this. It doesn't change my position but, I think, I understand your position better.

You’re welcome and thanks for taking the time to read it.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-07-2018, 08:11 PM
I did not play D1 sports. My dogs are unlikely to be D1 athletes. Therefore, I am inclined to take her words at face value.

The system is broken, top down. Fix it.

duke4ever19
05-07-2018, 09:03 PM
One of the best skewers of this is South Park's 'Crack Baby Athletic Association' episode.

I'd encourage everyone interested in this subject to give it a watch, even if South Park isn't your thing.

moonpie23
05-07-2018, 09:05 PM
"slavery"??? really?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-07-2018, 09:18 PM
I did not play D1 sports. My dogs are unlikely to be D1 athletes. Therefore, I am inclined to take her words at face value.

The system is broken, top down. Fix it.

Also, not being of African-American decent, I choose not to critique slavery comparisons.

dudog84
05-07-2018, 10:51 PM
Also, not being of African-American decent, I choose not to critique slavery comparisons.

I am neither black nor Jewish, but I am perfectly comfortable calling BS when a black or Jewish person makes a ridiculous comparison to slavery or the Holocaust. It trivializes those horrific conditions/events.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-07-2018, 10:56 PM
I am neither black nor Jewish, but I am perfectly comfortable calling BS when a black or Jewish person makes a ridiculous comparison to slavery or the Holocaust. It trivializes those horrific conditions/events.

Cool.

Not telling anyone else what to do. Just explaining my point o lf reference.

Neals384
05-07-2018, 11:41 PM
From ESPN (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/23434636/former-duke-basketball-star-wendell-carter-mother-likens-ncaa-system-slavery):. The only other time when labor does not get paid but yet someone else gets profits and the labor is black and the profit is white, is in slavery

in the deadspin transcript, linked earlier, she does not say labor is black and profit Is white. So either espn added this race bit, or deadspin edited it out.

by the way, why is the commission having panel discussions now, after their weak report has already been published?

Dr. Rosenrosen
05-08-2018, 05:48 AM
in the deadspin transcript, linked earlier, she does not say labor is black and profit Is white. So either espn added this race bit, or deadspin edited it out.

by the way, why is the commission having panel discussions now, after their weak report has already been published?
Strange. I watched the entire video of Mrs Carter and she never said the words “black” or “white” in her commentary. Maybe ESPN talked with her off camera? That would be pretty nasty of them to purposefully misquote her.

Troublemaker
05-08-2018, 07:08 AM
in the deadspin transcript, linked earlier, she does not say labor is black and profit Is white. So either espn added this race bit, or deadspin edited it out.

by the way, why is the commission having panel discussions now, after their weak report has already been published?

Good catch. Would spork if could.

To your question, the Knight Commission (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight_Commission) is different from the Commission on College Basketball.



Strange. I watched the entire video of Mrs Carter and she never said the words “black” or “white” in her commentary. Maybe ESPN talked with her off camera? That would be pretty nasty of them to purposefully misquote her.

While possible, ESPN clearly portrays it as part of the address she delivered. Here's a link (http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/23434636/former-duke-basketball-star-wendell-carter-mother-likens-ncaa-system-slavery) to the ESPN article again and a screengrab from a couple minutes ago in case it changes later on.

https://i.imgur.com/aFPZuMW.png

lotusland
05-08-2018, 07:23 AM
What’s the Knight Commission? Not Phil Knight I hope. A shoe company think tank to fix amateur athletics would be delicious irony.

Channing
05-08-2018, 07:31 AM
just seeing Ms. Carter's comments now - they are ridiculous and absurd. Kanye West just made himself a national mockery by saying that slavery was a choice. This isn't far behind. Her son could have had the stones to bet on himself and go play in Europe and bet on his development there (like Brandon Jennings and Emmanuel Mudiay) or he could have (I think) gone and played in the NBDL (like the kid who was going to Syracuse). Instead, he chose to have a posh year at Duke where he got world class training, world class education (assuming he took advantage of the opportunity), and world class exposure.

Just yesterday I read this article which is fascinating: https://www.al.com/entertainment/index.ssf/2018/05/zora_neale_hurstons_lost_book.html. Contrast that to today where I read Ms. Carter's hyperbolic diatribe, and her comparison to the tragic and unthinkable that was American slavery is mind boggling.

And, as an "oh by the way" to all of this - Ms Carter's beef should be with the NBA and the one-and-done rule. That is NOT an NCAA rule. As noted, nobody forced her son to go to Duke - that was HIS choice...key word being CHOICE

moonpie23
05-08-2018, 07:44 AM
i took history in school....i read....i've watched documentaries. slavery? please....what a cheap accusation...

Saratoga2
05-08-2018, 07:49 AM
"slavery"??? really?

A kid like Wendell, who is genuinely interested in academics, gets a scholarship worth $80k a year plus a chance to have his skills shown to the NBA world in a competitve environment. That certainly a benefit he gets and clearly what the parents wanted for him

Now, some kids who are not interested or capable of making their way academically but are recruited to play with no thought of educating them, seem to me to be in a different category. Changing the rules to allow them to go directly to the D league is an option that I support. Sham courses to keep them qualified to play is a ridiculous.

Some academically gifted students who aren't able to pay tuition are given scholarships that help them become established professionals who enhance the reputation of the university and help draw alumnae contributions that are meaningful. They are not looked on as under paid for their contributions to the later success of the institutions they attend.

I don't see how anything other than a stipend for a college athlete is warranted. It then turns the university into a professional sports forum. The stipend idea wouldn't probably work since if you give that to one, you have to give it to all athletes, and it becomes too expensive.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-08-2018, 08:59 AM
Personally, I have no issue if Carter's mother wants to make any comparison she wants. Her experience as a mother is her own, her experience as a black woman is her own, and if she feels a comparison to slavery is relevant and appropriate, far be it from me, who is very far removed from being any of those things, to pick it apart.

To me, the most... Patronizing and paternalizing aspect of this entire dynamic, is this idea that it is "best" for these 18 to 22 year old adults to be in college. I call horse poo on that. College isn't for everyone, and pretending that it is just a coincidence that these young men "ought" to be in school, where they can't cash in on their talent and will make money for everyone around them is a bit disgusting to me.

AtlDuke72
05-08-2018, 09:00 AM
I can overlook a reference to slavery (though from what I saw she never called K a slave master). In general if protesters don't do what they do, then the status quo will just try to conduct business as usual. I'm all for the NCAA taking hits, wherever they come from.

9F

No matter how stupid or nonsensical? Al ot of us pay or paid a fortune for our kids to get what she chose to accept for free for her son. I am more that an little bit tired of hearing from her.

Ian
05-08-2018, 09:21 AM
Personally, I have no issue if Carter's mother wants to make any comparison she wants. Her experience as a mother is her own, her experience as a black woman is her own, and if she feels a comparison to slavery is relevant and appropriate, far be it from me, who is very far removed from being any of those things, to pick it apart.

To me, the most... Patronizing and paternalizing aspect of this entire dynamic, is this idea that it is "best" for these 18 to 22 year old adults to be in college. I call horse poo on that. College isn't for everyone, and pretending that it is just a coincidence that these young men "ought" to be in school, where they can't cash in on their talent and will make money for everyone around them is a bit disgusting to me.

College isn't for everytone, true, but nobody forced these kids to go to college, and some of them don't. Even the NBA doesn't force kids going to college, all they did was close their doors for a year. People who don't like college can spend a year privately training, play overseas. or playing in the D-League.

mo.st.dukie
05-08-2018, 09:25 AM
Personally, I have no issue if Carter's mother wants to make any comparison she wants. Her experience as a mother is her own, her experience as a black woman is her own, and if she feels a comparison to slavery is relevant and appropriate, far be it from me, who is very far removed from being any of those things, to pick it apart.

To me, the most... Patronizing and paternalizing aspect of this entire dynamic, is this idea that it is "best" for these 18 to 22 year old adults to be in college. I call horse poo on that. College isn't for everyone, and pretending that it is just a coincidence that these young men "ought" to be in school, where they can't cash in on their talent and will make money for everyone around them is a bit disgusting to me.

There is not and has never been ANY rule that a kid HAS to go to college. Nowhere in the NBA age limit rule does it state that a player must go to college. All it says is that American players have to be 19 and one year removed from high school. What they choose to do in that one year is up to them. You are right, college isn't for everyone. That's why Brandon Jennings and Emmanuel Mudiay went to play overseas and why this Syracuse kid is going to the G-League this year. Nobody is forcing these kids to go to college.

Are there people out there who may be of the opinion that college is best for these kids. Sure. There's people out there with a lot of opinions, many of which are ridiculous.

JStuart
05-08-2018, 09:34 AM
There is not and has never been ANY rule that a kid HAS to go to college. Nowhere in the NBA age limit rule does it state that a player must go to college. All it says is that American players have to be 19 and one year removed from high school. What they choose to do in that one year is up to them. You are right, college isn't for everyone. That's why Brandon Jennings and Emmanuel Mudiay went to play overseas and why this Syracuse kid is going to the G-League this year. Nobody is forcing these kids to go to college.

Are there people out there who may be of the opinion that college is best for these kids. Sure. There's people out there with a lot of opinions, many of which are ridiculous.

I've forgotten the eponym of the rule that says, whoever is the first in an argument to compare someone to Hitler, loses. Maybe we need a corollary for the first person in an argument to compare a situation to slavery also loses?

ncexnyc
05-08-2018, 09:45 AM
I wonder if she'll be offended by the NBA Draft. After all the team that drafts Wendell will "OWN" the rights to him.

rsvman
05-08-2018, 09:48 AM
Is there a slavery version of Godwin's law?

dukelifer
05-08-2018, 10:23 AM
There is not and has never been ANY rule that a kid HAS to go to college. Nowhere in the NBA age limit rule does it state that a player must go to college. All it says is that American players have to be 19 and one year removed from high school. What they choose to do in that one year is up to them. You are right, college isn't for everyone. That's why Brandon Jennings and Emmanuel Mudiay went to play overseas and why this Syracuse kid is going to the G-League this year. Nobody is forcing these kids to go to college.

Are there people out there who may be of the opinion that college is best for these kids. Sure. There's people out there with a lot of opinions, many of which are ridiculous.
I guess I don't understand why it is not understood that these great players are getting an education in basketball- they go to learn to play the game (certainly better than in high school and AAU), learn to be a professional, learn to manage the press, and learn about nutrition and conditioning. If an athlete is so inclined they can even take courses in economics and psychology- or anything- to better prepare themselves for their future. All this is valuable and perhaps more than you will get in the NBA or G league. I think players should be able to benefit from their likeness or jersey sales if they are so inclined but for these one and done bball players- they are getting a 1 year education - pure and simple. Now for the other athletes - particularly in football, who will not be getting millions when they leave school- there are challenges in the current system- and many are not being prepared for their life after college- and some leave with injuries or latent conditions that will affect their lives forever with no long term insurance. That is a problem. But for the OAD players - this is probably a win-win. Carter got great exposure- great training and is ready for the next step. My guess is that Carter's mom was thinking more about the other group of athletes.

killerleft
05-08-2018, 10:35 AM
Very few will end up making millions. Even can't miss prospects like Okafor and Greg Oden are not a sure bet for a long term NBA career.

The rest of them are getting a free ride for an education that opens up career paths like HS coaching.

It is an NBA rule that has resulted in the OAD system, not an NCAA rule. The Carters and others chose the best clear path given that rule. Mrs. Carter should direct her frustration at the NBA, not the NCAA. The NCAA will make just as much money without the OADs in the system, as it did in the mid 00s.

Thanks much for this last sentence. It is perhaps the most important one that will be revealed in this thread.

Maybe all the NCAA has to do is add a disclaimer to whatever paperwork a student-athlete has to sign reminding the one-and-done that his participation in all likelihood does NOT bring in more money for the NCAA. If one believes this, then why would the NCAA's members be required to foot the bill?

Looked at from this direction, perhaps the one-and-done athletes owe the colleges for helping them build their "brand".:)

camion
05-08-2018, 10:41 AM
Thanks much for this last sentence. It is perhaps the most important one that will be revealed in this thread.

Maybe all the NCAA has to do is add a disclaimer to whatever paperwork a student-athlete has to sign reminding the one-and-done that his participation in all likelihood does NOT bring in more money for the NCAA. If one believes this, then why would the NCAA's members be required to foot the bill?

Looked at from this direction, perhaps the one-and-done athletes owe the colleges for helping them build their "brand".:)

I would think it's more of a symbiotic relationship between player and school than a parasitic one, except perhaps for the very few top players.*

If the OAD rule were eliminated I suspect the next group of players would bubble up to fill their positions on college teams.


*Some schools and some players will always engage in gaming the system.

miramar
05-08-2018, 11:00 AM
An elite player like Wendell Carter may lose some money for the one year he will be in college, but he turned nineteen last month and since he was lucky enough to avoid any serious injury, he will soon start making plenty of money.

Nevertheless, Mrs. Carter seems much more worried about the players who don't have Wendell's academic or athletic abilities. She also must have had a very negative experience as a student athlete herself, and it appears that race must have had a lot to do with what happened to her at Ole Miss. More important, she is spot on when she talks about the players who are recruited strictly for their athletic abilities when the schools know that they can't handle college work.

I just hope that the slavery comments don't drown out the rest of her comments.

MrPoon
05-08-2018, 11:28 AM
Full disclosure, I did not read her entire speech, rather just the quotes in a few articles and that typically is a terrible way to approach this...

I have a great deal of respect for Mrs. Carter. She seems to have raised a great young man who genuinely respects academics and whose head seems to be in the right place. I also respect that she has the confidence and willingness to speak out on an issue that is so broken that even the usually clueless NCAA had a commission to address (I disagree with the majority of its findings but that is for another time). I do suspect that the magnatude of her response is somewhat tainted by the FBI report and seeing her name all over the place for doing something that most reasonable people would find inconsequential. But that is just my speculation.

There are a lot of reasonable comments posted above about the choices actually afforded the Carter family that they chose not to execute, European ball, wait a year and train, etc. Each comes with negatives, less quality training, lower exposure, than going the NCAA route but all were available.

Also missing is the fact that for many professionals there are many barriers to entry. I work in the securities industry. We have MANY licenses that are required which cost time and money. Does someone need the test to aquire the information for the industry? No. Are they still required? Yep. Shoot, even to cut hair requires a license. The NBA has one requirement, age. The NCAA has a “course” that can help accelerate your success while you wait to attain that requirement. Most licensure classes have a cost, the NCAA’s “cost” is one year of basketball service in exchange for training, an education if you want, room & board in typically very nice settings etc. Hear me say I don’t like the current system but this structure isn’t as unique as it seems, or as evil.

I don’t see the NCAA staying away from the inevitable march to paying some of these players if the NBA doesn’t change. But Mrs Carter seems to be missing some broader perspectives on this issue. And she surely knows that bringing these analogies into the conversation is like dropping napalm on the conversation. It may be necessary but I fear the words may distract from the message. The fact that the overwhelming majority of these young men are African American is certainly worth paying attention to but that alone doesn’t appear to be the driving motivation nor the NBA or NCAA. Perhaps I am wrong there, in this regard I do not trust the NCAA. (why hockey players can have agents and BB can’t is beyond me).

heartofgold
05-08-2018, 01:17 PM
The comparison to slavery is clearly too much. The crux of the issue is that the NBA and NCAA are monopolies over the labor rules. Better or worse, they make the rules and you live with them or not. If you believe in free market capitalism you say that's simply the market...

Not to take this thread too off topic - I think the more interesting discussion is with college football and brain injuries. Young kids, mostly poor (or at least poorer than the national average), by the thousands go to play college football for the chance at an NFL payday. Evidence is clear now that they are sacrificing serious risks of brain injury. When you're poor you take the risk. I know I won't allow my kids to play football. I'd say this is more of a system of exploitation of young kids than any other sport...

slower
05-08-2018, 01:49 PM
Uh, what? I would LOVE for my son or daughter to be "treated poorly" by being able to attend and be a part of Duke's basketball program on a full-ride scholarhip with an insane amount of perks and amazing connections for life. They are treated like KINGS. Yes, you could obviously argue that they are not being paid market rate, but to say they're "treated poorly" is ridiculous.

Mrs. Carter's comments show that there's plenty of hypocrisy to go around.

"Treated poorly." Give me a f-ing break.

GeneBanksManCrush
05-08-2018, 01:57 PM
Well, if all this is true Wendell is going to be a very very wealthy slave.

Ian
05-08-2018, 02:03 PM
Let's step back from looking at this from the perspective of a Duke fan defending the Duke basketball program.

If you objectively look at what happened at UNCheat. Where players never got any value of "education" since they didn't go to class or learn anything. And take out the few that will make million in the pros. What happened to the rest of the kids who played there. They didn't get an education, they aren't good enough for pros. What did they get out of it other than being used by the school to get some wins.

And the NCAA gave UNCheat a pass, essentially saying they don't care about making sure the school provides an real education.

If the players are supposedly getting an education in exchange for playing sports for free, and they don't actually get an education, what are they getting, it's maybe not slavery but it's pretty obvious exploitation, right?

left_hook_lacey
05-08-2018, 02:24 PM
This type of over the top hyperbole does nothing to address the problem, and only insults those that had to endure real slavery(which still goes on).

I dare Mrs. Carter to stand face to face with an actual slave and let that person explain what a day in their life is like. Then, she can follow up with, "I know what you mean, my son is a slave too. He was forced to go play basketball, a child's game, at one of the most prestigious University's in the United States, free of charge, all while receiving world class instruction on how to become a professional in his sport, world class nutritional and exercise training, and world class media coverage. Not to mention the droves of fans and admirers fawning at his every move, hoping for just an autograph. To top it all off, he had to endure this grueling tragedy for almost nine months. The horror! Sure, he could've gone to another country and played for money, or gone to the G-league and trained for a year that way and gotten paid, but he only had those 3 choices, can you imagine????!!!

He was so distraught about his decision to have to go to the plantation of one and done's that is Duke University, that he made a video about his heart-breaking decision to serve his nine months as a slave. Look how mortified he is in that video! No child should ever have to endure such senseless enslavement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y1rcNwO74U

Reddevil
05-08-2018, 02:33 PM
Let's step back from looking at this from the perspective of a Duke fan defending the Duke basketball program.

If you objectively look at what happened at UNCheat. Where players never got any value of "education" since they didn't go to class or learn anything. And take out the few that will make million in the pros. What happened to the rest of the kids who played there. They didn't get an education, they aren't good enough for pros. What did they get out of it other than being used by the school to get some wins.

And the NCAA gave UNCheat a pass, essentially saying they don't care about making sure the school provides an real education.

If the players are supposedly getting an education in exchange for playing sports for free, and they don't actually get an education, what are they getting, it's maybe not slavery but it's pretty obvious exploitation, right?

Even in the hideous UNC case, the kids that wanted to get an education could have chosen to take legitimate classes. How often do we hear you get out of it what you put into it? The reason slavery should never be used in an argument like this is that the individuals have choices. Funny how the people that claim exploitation are the very people that get upset when talk of getting rid of athletic scholarships is presented. Can't have it both ways.

mattman91
05-08-2018, 02:36 PM
This type of over the top hyperbole does nothing to address the problem, and only insults those that had to endure real slavery(which still goes on).

I dare Mrs. Carter to stand face to face with an actual slave and let that person explain what a day in their life is like. Then, she can follow up with, "I know what you mean, my son is a slave too. He was forced to go play basketball, a child's game, at one of the most prestigious University's in the United States, free of charge, all while receiving world class instruction on how to become a professional in his sport, world class nutritional and exercise training, and world class media coverage. Not to mention the droves of fans and admirers fawning at his every move, hoping for just an autograph. To top it all off, he had to endure this grueling tragedy for almost nine months. The horror! Sure, he could've gone to another country and played for money, or gone to the G-league and trained for a year that way and gotten paid, but he only had those 3 choices, can you imagine????!!!

He was so distraught about his decision to have to go to the plantation of one and done's that is Duke University, that he made a video about his heart-breaking decision to serve his nine months as a slave. Look how mortified he is in that video! No child should ever have to endure such senseless enslavement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9y1rcNwO74U

Couldn't spork, but this is spot on.

Ian
05-08-2018, 02:41 PM
Even in the hideous UNC case, the kids that wanted to get an education could have chosen to take legitimate classes. How often do we hear you get out of it what you put into it? The reason slavery should never be used in an argument like this is that the individuals have choices. Funny how the people that claim exploitation are the very people that get upset when talk of getting rid of athletic scholarships is presented. Can't have it both ways.

Weren't the accusations that they kids were funneled into the fake classes and told "if you wanted an education go to Harvard" when some objected.

Jeffrey
05-08-2018, 02:41 PM
If you objectively look at what happened at UNCheat. Where players never got any value of "education" since they didn't go to class or learn anything. And take out the few that will make million in the pros. What happened to the rest of the kids who played there. They didn't get an education, they aren't good enough for pros. What did they get out of it other than being used by the school to get some wins.

And the NCAA gave UNCheat a pass, essentially saying they don't care about making sure the school provides an real education.

If the players are supposedly getting an education in exchange for playing sports for free, and they don't actually get an education, what are they getting, it's maybe not slavery but it's pretty obvious exploitation, right?

Does UNC refuse to allow their student-athletes to attend real classes and get real degrees?

IMO, many students waste a college opportunity. It's not unique to UNC and/or student-athletes.

My former next-door neighbor played college hoops "for free". He picked up two degrees, in the process, and never played in the NBA. I suspect he will make $40-80 million in 2018 and will one day be a billionaire. He was so pleased with his student-athlete experience that he put a new building on their campus.

PeteZaHut
05-08-2018, 02:48 PM
I heard Trajon Langdon speak once about how he saw his NBA career as a bonus because his goal was to use basketball to get himself an education. Everything after that was great, but that wasn't his goal. It seems that kids are discouraged from thinking that way now.

Ian
05-08-2018, 02:55 PM
Does UNC refuse to allow their student-athletes to attend real classes and get real degrees?

IMO, many students waste a college opportunity. It's not unique to UNC and/or student-athletes.

My former next-door neighbor played college hoops "for free". He picked up two degrees, in the process, and never played in the NBA. I suspect he will make $40-80 million in 2018 and will one day be a billionaire. He was so pleased with his student-athlete experience that he put a new building on their campus.


I agree that a discerning student can probably get an education without the NCAA ensuring the school provides it.

But what is the NCAA's responsiblity to the other student-athletes to ensure they get what the school promised them? And what is their responsiblity when a school in the NCAA did everything they can to avoid giving their student athlete a real education.

The NCAA deserved to be called out when they on the one hand talk about the value of education and on the other had turn a blind eye to what happened at UNC.

Jeffrey
05-08-2018, 03:34 PM
I agree that a discerning student can probably get an education without the NCAA ensuring the school provides it.

But what is the NCAA's responsiblity to the other student-athletes to ensure they get what the school promised them? And what is their responsiblity when a school in the NCAA did everything they can to avoid giving their student athlete a real education.

The NCAA deserved to be called out when they on the one hand talk about the value of education and on the other had turn a blind eye to what happened at UNC.

I fully agree, but was responding to the part of your statement which seems most applicable to Mrs. Carter's comments. Wendell played at Duke and, IIRC, did well in real classes.


If the players are supposedly getting an education in exchange for playing sports for free, and they don't actually get an education, what are they getting, it's maybe not slavery but it's pretty obvious exploitation, right?

All of my friends, who played college hoops, have benefitted greatly from their degrees. None of them felt exploited. Some ended up with multiple degrees from great schools.

Newton_14
05-08-2018, 04:43 PM
Even in the hideous UNC case, the kids that wanted to get an education could have chosen to take legitimate classes. How often do we hear you get out of it what you put into it? The reason slavery should never be used in an argument like this is that the individuals have choices. Funny how the people that claim exploitation are the very people that get upset when talk of getting rid of athletic scholarships is presented. Can't have it both ways.
Actually the part in bold is not even true. I forget his name but one of the football players sued the Cheats because he wanted to major in Criminal Justice and they would not let him. They forced him into AFAM.

devildeac
05-08-2018, 04:54 PM
Actually the part in bold is not even true. I forget his name but one of the football players sued the Cheats because he wanted to major in Criminal Justice and they would not let him. They forced him into AFAM.

Tydreke Powell maybe?

https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24796287/ex-unc-football-player-talks-academic-scandal-calls-roy-williams-a-snake

"If you ain't inside of there, you don't know what's going on. But Butch Davis came into a meeting one day and he said 'If y'all came here for an education, you should've went to Harvard,'" Powell told the show's hosts.

"It ain't that we go in there and say 'we want to take African-American studies.' How did we know about it? They put it on the table for us ... these coaches, man, [they say], 'We're going to get you three and out of here.'"

Powell also said that he took one of the "paper classes" offered by the African-American Studies department, though he graduated with a degree in communications."

Always happy to dig up some old, dead and buried quotes slamming the cheatin' bastards down the road.

GeneBanksManCrush
05-08-2018, 05:00 PM
I heard Trajon Langdon speak once about how he saw his NBA career as a bonus because his goal was to use basketball to get himself an education. Everything after that was great, but that wasn't his goal. It seems that kids are discouraged from thinking that way now.

Yes, but Trajan is the son of a college professor.

DukieInKansas
05-08-2018, 05:24 PM
Yes, but Trajan is the son of a college professor.

And the Padres paid his tuition, as I recall.

uh_no
05-08-2018, 06:58 PM
Does UNC refuse to allow their student-athletes to attend real classes and get real degrees?


Well they only hand out UNC degrees, so they kinda have their hands tied.

KenTankerous
05-09-2018, 07:14 AM
Y'all ever do that conflict resolution thing where errybody's spot at the table has two bowls of water - one hot, one cold? Put your hands in each bowl and let 'em get used to the temp (it's a good idea to go to the bathroom before this meeting). Then once y'all are used to the temp, put your hands in the big bowl in the middle of the table full of room temp water.

Is that water hot or cold?

It's both. Both are real, both are valid. But neither is the truth.

Your perception of any situation has more to do with where you are coming from than what is actually there.

Like most, I cringed hearing Momma Carter's analogy. But she is a mother, not an administrator, not a regulator, not a legislator - a Mother - being asked her feelings and opinions and she expressed them from her heart.

I found it refreshing that she wasn't reading some prepared, professionally coached spin doctor bullhockey.

You go Momma Carter! You aint gotta be right, or liked. You just gotta be Momma!

sagegrouse
05-09-2018, 07:52 AM
Yes, but Trajan is the son of a college professor.

Wasn't Trajan a math major?

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 08:49 AM
No matter how stupid or nonsensical? Al ot of us pay or paid a fortune for our kids to get what she chose to accept for free for her son. I am more that an little bit tired of hearing from her.

No offense, but those kids didn't generate the revenue Wendell did for Duke while they were in school. Those kids weren't one of the five students most critical in the success of the University's most visible and lucrative endeavor. The professors those kids learned from weren't making millions of dollars annually. The programs they studied in weren't one of the important programs in securing a $6B TV deal, allowing employees of what amounts to an accreditation association to make millions. Those students weren't risking -- even if remotely -- a million dollar annual salary propping up that system.

There's no point comparing your kids or me or any of us who were "regular" students at Duke with kids like Wendell or Marvin or Jayson or Brandon or Kyrie.

And yes, the one and done rule is of NBA origin, but the system of "amatuerism" is all the NCAA it, if not Duke -- and Mrs. Carter's criticisms weren't pointed at Duke specifically -- so it's fair game for critical discussion.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-09-2018, 08:54 AM
I disagree with several posters above who insinuate that the OADs in general have no impact on the revenue collected by college basketball. Those of us on this board would tune in to every game regardless of the players in the uniforms. We are Duke fanatics.

Most sports fans tune in for the tournament and to see guys they saw on Sportscenter highlights. They buy Bagley jerseys, but wouldn't buy Plumlee jerseys. They know Austin Rivers and Jason Tatum went to Duke, and this changes their interest level.

These superstar players absolutely increase TV ratings, ESPN exposure, and merchandise sales.

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 08:57 AM
Even in the hideous UNC case, the kids that wanted to get an education could have chosen to take legitimate classes. How often do we hear you get out of it what you put into it? The reason slavery should never be used in an argument like this is that the individuals have choices. Funny how the people that claim exploitation are the very people that get upset when talk of getting rid of athletic scholarships is presented. Can't have it both ways.

Many athletes -- particularly, but not exclusively, in revenue sports, don't really have a ton of choice about course loads, unless they want to go against the strong recommendations of the program that is giving them the scholarship. That has consequences.

As one example, my niece was on a school's equestrian team (and on a partial scholarship), and she was *strongly* encouraged to change her class load from a science major because of the additional workload it would require, keeping her from additional practice time. She didn't, and it had an adverse effect on her standing on the team. She ended up dropping the sport and transferring. It wasn't unique to her sport at the school she originally attended. It's one story and one school, but matches what you hear -- if you are listening -- from athletes not infrequently.

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 09:02 AM
All of my friends, who played college hoops, have benefitted greatly from their degrees. None of them felt exploited. Some ended up with multiple degrees from great schools.

How many were first round NBA picks? How many would have been coming out of HS?

kmspeaks
05-09-2018, 09:22 AM
Many athletes -- particularly, but not exclusively, in revenue sports, don't really have a ton of choice about course loads, unless they want to go against the strong recommendations of the program that is giving them the scholarship. That has consequences.

As one example, my niece was on a school's equestrian team (and on a partial scholarship), and she was *strongly* encouraged to change her class load from a science major because of the additional workload it would require, keeping her from additional practice time. She didn't, and it had an adverse effect on her standing on the team. She ended up dropping the sport and transferring. It wasn't unique to her sport at the school she originally attended. It's one story and one school, but matches what you hear -- if you are listening -- from athletes not infrequently.

They have a choice whether or not to accept the scholarship. I'm sorry but I don't see a problem with having kids make choices, that's the way life works. At 15 I had to choose whether I wanted to continue to play high school basketball or commit to serious year round volleyball, I couldn't do both. At 18 I had to choose between an athletic training major and being a scholarship softball player, I couldn't do both. At 24 I chose a career as a teacher/coach despite earning an MBA because I wanted to work with kids and be heavily involved in my two favorite sports. In doing so I probably cost myself significant earnings but I also probably couldn't do both.

The slavery comparison is ridiculous because all of these kids have choices. Each choice comes with sacrifices but the choice is still theirs. If you really want to study a particular major and being a varsity athlete makes that difficult then you can play at the club or intramural level and pay for school on your own. If you have absolutely no interest in going to college and just want to play basketball then you can go to the G League or overseas, you probably won't be flying private charters and playing on national TV but you still have that choice. I'm not going to shed any tears for you because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-09-2018, 09:32 AM
They have a choice whether or not to accept the scholarship. I'm sorry but I don't see a problem with having kids make choices, that's the way life works. At 15 I had to choose whether I wanted to continue to play high school basketball or commit to serious year round volleyball, I couldn't do both. At 18 I had to choose between an athletic training major and being a scholarship softball player, I couldn't do both. At 24 I chose a career as a teacher/coach despite earning an MBA because I wanted to work with kids and be heavily involved in my two favorite sports. In doing so I probably cost myself significant earnings but I also probably couldn't do both.

The slavery comparison is ridiculous because all of these kids have choices. Each choice comes with sacrifices but the choice is still theirs. If you really want to study a particular major and being a varsity athlete makes that difficult then you can play at the club or intramural level and pay for school on your own. If you have absolutely no interest in going to college and just want to play basketball then you can go to the G League or overseas, you probably won't be flying private charters and playing on national TV but you still have that choice. I'm not going to shed any tears for you because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

THIS^^^^^^^ a hundred sporks! Amen brother, preach it, pass the plate....

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 09:40 AM
They have a choice whether or not to accept the scholarship. I'm sorry but I don't see a problem with having kids make choices, that's the way life works. At 15 I had to choose whether I wanted to continue to play high school basketball or commit to serious year round volleyball, I couldn't do both. At 18 I had to choose between an athletic training major and being a scholarship softball player, I couldn't do both. At 24 I chose a career as a teacher/coach despite earning an MBA because I wanted to work with kids and be heavily involved in my two favorite sports. In doing so I probably cost myself significant earnings but I also probably couldn't do both.

The slavery comparison is ridiculous because all of these kids have choices. Each choice comes with sacrifices but the choice is still theirs. If you really want to study a particular major and being a varsity athlete makes that difficult then you can play at the club or intramural level and pay for school on your own. If you have absolutely no interest in going to college and just want to play basketball then you can go to the G League or overseas, you probably won't be flying private charters and playing on national TV but you still have that choice. I'm not going to shed any tears for you because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

The point I was countering was that student athletes didn't have to take fake classes at UNC -- or get shuttled into largely worthless classes at any number of other football and basketball factories. The programs -- not all, mind you, but some -- force kids into easier (or non-existent down the road) in order to maximize their athletic opportunity and experience. I guess kids don't have to make that choice -- but if they do, they end up marginalized or forced out of the program. So they give up the "compensation" they are getting.

When the scholarship is the "value" or the "compensation" that people are arguing student-athletes get in return for playing, forcing kids into fake classes or largely worthless majors is a problem with arguing the scholarship is compensation. That's the point I was getting at.

Ian
05-09-2018, 09:41 AM
They have a choice whether or not to accept the scholarship. I'm sorry but I don't see a problem with having kids make choices, that's the way life works. At 15 I had to choose whether I wanted to continue to play high school basketball or commit to serious year round volleyball, I couldn't do both. At 18 I had to choose between an athletic training major and being a scholarship softball player, I couldn't do both. At 24 I chose a career as a teacher/coach despite earning an MBA because I wanted to work with kids and be heavily involved in my two favorite sports. In doing so I probably cost myself significant earnings but I also probably couldn't do both.

The slavery comparison is ridiculous because all of these kids have choices. Each choice comes with sacrifices but the choice is still theirs. If you really want to study a particular major and being a varsity athlete makes that difficult then you can play at the club or intramural level and pay for school on your own. If you have absolutely no interest in going to college and just want to play basketball then you can go to the G League or overseas, you probably won't be flying private charters and playing on national TV but you still have that choice. I'm not going to shed any tears for you because you can't have your cake and eat it too.

But the question is why are the schools making you make that choice. If the primary purpose of a school is education, and the value of the scholarship they are giving you is the education you receive, why are they making you choose between taking the classes you want and play the sport. If this was the actions a professional minor league franchise I could understand, but not from a instutition that purports to be about education.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-09-2018, 09:44 AM
But the question is why are the schools making you make that choice. If the primary purpose of a school is education, and the value of the scholarship they are giving you is the education you receive, why are they making you choose between taking the classes you want and play the sport. If this was the actions a professional minor league franchise I could understand, but not from a instutition that purports to be about education.

I think you face an immense burden to lay the blame for "the choice" on the schools. I also think it's a fallacy to base general opinions or make policy on the tiny handful of outliers...

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 09:46 AM
I think you face an immense burden to lay the blame for "the choice" on the schools. I also think it's a fallacy to base general opinions or make policy on the tiny handful of outliers...

I think you need to prove that it's a tiny handful of outliers first.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-09-2018, 09:48 AM
But the question is why are the schools making you make that choice. If the primary purpose of a school is education, and the value of the scholarship they are giving you is the education you receive, why are they making you choose between taking the classes you want and play the sport. If this was the actions a professional minor league franchise I could understand, but not from a instutition that purports to be about education.

It is an exploitive system from top to bottom. That doesn't absolve the schools, but it does explain how we got here.

The idea that there are rational options for 18 year old kids is laughable. Two players who took a path through Europe are not a realistic example.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-09-2018, 09:52 AM
I think you need to prove that it's a tiny handful of outliers first.

Okay, so you're saying being NBA ready is the rule, not the exception for college players? I'm all ears for evidence of that.

Chicago 1995
05-09-2018, 09:57 AM
Okay, so you're saying being NBA ready is the rule, not the exception for college players? I'm all ears for evidence of that.

I thought you meant that the lack of choice as to major, or funneling student athletes to certain majors was limited to a small number of programs and schools.

Obviously being NBA ready is limited to a small number of student athletes. I'm not sure why they (or future pros in football) should be shoehorned into the same rules at a rower or a fencer or pole vaulter.

Jeffrey
05-09-2018, 09:59 AM
Well they only hand out UNC degrees, so they kinda have their hands tied.

Basket weaving degrees are real.

English
05-09-2018, 10:08 AM
It is an exploitive system from top to bottom. That doesn't absolve the schools, but it does explain how we got here.

The idea that there are rational options for 18 year old kids is laughable. Two players who took a path through Europe are not a realistic example.

I'm getting a bit confused about the nature of the exploitation inherent in the system that many are arguing. Are all athletes being exploited by the adults irrespective of their sport/talent/market value, or are the top performers in the revenue sports being exploited for the benefit of maintaining the rest of the system? I could support the latter (although it's an utilitarian construct), but the former seems a stretch to me. For all the "my niece" stories about having to adjust someone's course of study, there are plenty of stories about athletes with econ or social science or whatever majors excelling and leaving school with far more earning potential and life experience than they'd otherwise have without a college scholarship. It seems throughout the last few pages of the thread, folks are arguing past each other.

The crux, in my view, is whether the system needs to been torn down from the foundations because the top revenue athletes aren't getting their market value, nor are there enough hours in the day to dedicate to their sport and studies (in the event that they actually want to study). I don't subscribe to that belief. In fact, I'd love for my own son to find himself in a position that he could attend college in exchange for competing in a sport, whether as a highly recruited basketball player or as a country club sport athlete. Of course, my perspective is informed by my own background and station, but so is everyone else's.

Jeffrey
05-09-2018, 10:09 AM
How many were first round NBA picks? How many would have been coming out of HS?

IMO, this is exactly why many of the debates, on this thread, exist. Some posters are commenting about OAD situations (the original thread topic) and some have moved on to commenting about non-OAD (such as my post, you quoted, responding to the other 99% of student-athletes) situations.

This is my OAD response....

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?41931-Wendell-Carter-s-Mother-Is-Angry&p=1068237#post1068237

Jeffrey
05-09-2018, 10:33 AM
The man with the gold makes the rules.

Mrs. Carter, the NBA made the OAD rule. IMO, your son was not a slave and he did benefit from his year at Duke.

On our other topic (non-OAD).... NCAA revenue ($1 billion+) comes from the athlete, so the priority in student-athlete is athlete. Nothing comes for free.

MarkD83
05-09-2018, 11:27 AM
The man with the gold makes the rules.

Mrs. Carter, the NBA made the OAD rule. IMO, your son was not a slave and he did benefit from his year at Duke.

On our other topic (non-OAD)... NCAA revenue ($1 billion+) comes from the athlete, so the priority in student-athlete is athlete. Nothing comes for free.

Jeffrey points out the key issue that everyone that complains about the NCAA forgets. The OAD rule is an NBA rule. But of course no one is going to complain about the NBA because in 1 year the best basketball players will be paid by the NBA.

A second point that folks have made on this board is that there are many options besides college that can be pursued to spend the 1 year. The fact that college basketball is by far the best way to spend that 1 year and that 90+% of the players take that route does not mean it is the only route. So the college route is picked by players because of all of the things it has to offer 1) great coaching 2) national exposure 3) high level of competition...oh and by the way a year of free education. I will also add that once admitted to an NCAA school, these players can take their time getting a degree if they so choose. If the normal student were to spend freshman year at a school and then "drop out" they would have to reapply.

Duke79UNLV77
05-09-2018, 12:08 PM
What basketball needs is a true minor league system like baseball! But see the off-topic thread on how exploitative the MLB minor league system is.

I could see 30 or more kids declaring straight out of high school once the OAD rule goes away. I think that will be the best choice for maybe 2-5 per year. I could see the parents of those kids being frustrated that their sons can't go directly to the NBA now. The fact that college is the best option for the "gap year" doesn't mean it is the only option. And it certainly doesn't make it akin to slavery. I think the schools that don't care about the kids' education are exploiting them, whether that be UNCheat or Cincy under Huggins, which I think didn't graduate a basketball player for a decade or so, and not because they were leaving for the NBA early. The opportunity is there for any of the players to get a free education, though. Even Bagley is more marketable and prepared after his one year at Duke, though he would have been just fine in the NBA this year. It's a first world problem to complain about having to play a sport while attending a world-class university for free for a year.

I'm not going to make any judgments on WC's mom for her latest statements. She's a mom and gets to speak emotionally about her son. That said, I do question the sincerity of her comments about wanting WC to go to Harvard and wanting him to return for his sophomore year at Duke. Juxtaposed against her anti-college comments, these statements look like publicity stunts and branding efforts.

I really enjoyed watching WC this year and will root for him in the NBA. From my vantage point, he really enjoyed playing for Duke and gave it his all on and off the court. I only wish he hadn't shot an air ball from about 4 feet with about 30 seconds left in regulation against Kansas, but I can certainly understand nerves getting the better of a young man in that situation. Of, and it was a charge in OT.

MartyClark
05-09-2018, 12:19 PM
It is an exploitive system from top to bottom. That doesn't absolve the schools, but it does explain how we got here.

The idea that there are rational options for 18 year old kids is laughable. Two players who took a path through Europe are not a realistic example.

Mountain Devil-

I suspect that we ultimately agree to disagree on this. I don't think the Europe option is laughable. The fact that only two players did it may not speak to the issue of how viable an option Europe is but, rather, how good an option college basketball is.

Many of the recent Duke OAD guys could have gone to Europe, earned a couple of hundred thousand dollars, and not had to go to class. I think the fact that none of them went Euro speaks to the fact that they are not all that oppressed playing at Duke.

Anyhow, I'm all in favor of these kids being allowed to go directly to the NBA from high school. We probably agree on this.

johnb
05-09-2018, 01:12 PM
Wendell's mother is, I think, discussing issues far broader than bball.

African Americans attend their state's flagship institutions at much lower rates than might be predicted from the percentage in the population. African American kids attend K-12 schools that tend to be far worse than white kids. Education spending is based on real estate values, which has led to longstanding educational opportunities that are separate and unequal. Revenue producing athletes are the only reason that university reps ever visit many poor communities since they know their university will accept nobody, ever, from many poor schools who isn't an elite athlete. The universities do a bunch of things to keep these under-prepared athletes eligible while also maximizing their ability to perform. Obviously, Wendell, himself, isn't a slave to this system, but the current system stems from slavery, and it shouldn't be surprising that a smart mom has chosen to speak out against a broader American system that undereducates folks from the African American community, sets up laws that contribute to absurdly long prison sentences for people who commit certain types of crimes and who can't afford good legal representation, etc, all which contribute to devastated communities and an intensification of a spiral of poverty and ongoing marginalization.

Just because she, herself isn't drowning, and her own son is a multidimensional superstar in this system doesn't mean she shouldn't speak out against perceived injustice.

MartyClark
05-09-2018, 02:14 PM
Wendell's mother is, I think, discussing issues far broader than bball.

African Americans attend their state's flagship institutions at much lower rates than might be predicted from the percentage in the population. African American kids attend K-12 schools that tend to be far worse than white kids. Education spending is based on real estate values, which has led to longstanding educational opportunities that are separate and unequal. Revenue producing athletes are the only reason that university reps ever visit many poor communities since they know their university will accept nobody, ever, from many poor schools who isn't an elite athlete. The universities do a bunch of things to keep these under-prepared athletes eligible while also maximizing their ability to perform. Obviously, Wendell, himself, isn't a slave to this system, but the current system stems from slavery, and it shouldn't be surprising that a smart mom has chosen to speak out against a broader American system that undereducates folks from the African American community, sets up laws that contribute to absurdly long prison sentences for people who commit certain types of crimes and who can't afford good legal representation, etc, all which contribute to devastated communities and an intensification of a spiral of poverty and ongoing marginalization.

Just because she, herself isn't drowning, and her own son is a multidimensional superstar in this system doesn't mean she shouldn't speak out against perceived injustice.

She has an absolute right to speak out against perceived injustice. I think you have raised issues far broader and more complicated than she raised.

-jk
05-09-2018, 02:50 PM
But the question is why are the schools making you make that choice. If the primary purpose of a school is education, and the value of the scholarship they are giving you is the education you receive, why are they making you choose between taking the classes you want and play the sport. If this was the actions a professional minor league franchise I could understand, but not from a instutition that purports to be about education.

One reason (albeit of many) I'm good with being a Duke fan: we've had a bunch of very committed athletes go on to significant post-graduate scholastic work. They didn't get there whilst skimping on their undergrad work in favor of their sport of choice. (Though I'm sure skimping is an option for a handful of 'em; hello, M. Carter...)

-jk

DevilYouKnow
05-09-2018, 02:55 PM
As someone whose parents paid a lot money for me to get a Duke education, I somewhat bristle at the notion that college basketball is exploitation.

Yes, I had none of Wendell's marketable skills, but if college ball seems that exploitative, then why not take other avenues for getting to the NBA? If college ball is the best avenue, then maybe it's worth it to play for Duke for a year and further your education?

I don't know. There's a weird sense of entitlement among families who see this as some form of servitude.

Do players deserve some of the revenue they help generate? Well, that's a good question, but in my opinion a separate argument.

Jeffrey
05-09-2018, 03:44 PM
She has an absolute right to speak out against perceived injustice. I think you have raised issues far broader and more complicated than she raised.

Yep, more PPB than OAD issues. IMO, Mrs. Carter was addressing OAD issues.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-09-2018, 04:13 PM
She has an absolute right to speak out against perceived injustice.

Did anyone question her right? Or was it just a case of other people exercising THEIR right to comment on her comments? I didn't see anyone question her right to speak.

Steven43
05-09-2018, 05:38 PM
Yep, more PPB than OAD issues. IMO, Mrs. Carter was addressing OAD issues.

You definitely get the Condensed Writing Award. You should have written it Mrs. C, though.

MartyClark
05-09-2018, 06:40 PM
Did anyone question her right? Or was it just a case of other people exercising THEIR right to comment on her comments? I didn't see anyone question her right to speak.

I don't think anyone questioned her right to speak. I was simply agreeing with the poster that she had the right to speak up. Nothing more intended.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-10-2018, 08:07 AM
These superstar players absolutely increase TV ratings, ESPN exposure, and merchandise sales.


With due respect, I think you're overlooking a few things.

First, the merchandise sales are so tiny as to be a rounding error.

Second, and more important, people tune in college to see the teams far more than NBA fans, who often tune in to see certain players. People who watch March Madness do so because it's March Madness, and the interest level in non NBA players like those on Loyola or UMBC are what drive that. The unknown coaches emerging is another compelling issue.

Third, you take Marvin Bagley and a few others out of college because they're already in the NBA...there are still college superstars and they can still do amazing dunks and alley oops and hit clutch threes...and they will be on Sports Center, etc.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-10-2018, 08:21 AM
With due respect, I think you're overlooking a few things.

First, the merchandise sales are so tiny as to be a rounding error.

Second, and more important, people tune in college to see the teams far more than NBA fans, who often tune in to see certain players. People who watch March Madness do so because it's March Madness, and the interest level in non NBA players like those on Loyola or UMBC are what drive that. The unknown coaches emerging is another compelling issue.

Third, you take Marvin Bagley and a few others out of college because they're already in the NBA...there are still college superstars and they can still do amazing dunks and alley oops and hit clutch threes...and they will be on Sports Center, etc.

You think Duke hasn't gotten more revenue and exposure in the OAD era?

Not trying to be snarky, just genuinely curious. It seems clear to me that Tatum, Bagley, Parker, and even Irving drew more headlines, clicks, SC Top 10s, and whatever other nonsense converts to dollars and cents than Lance Thomas and Zoubek.

Again, I suggest that this board doesn't represent the average college basketball fan, who turns on the TV in February to see what teams are good and decides between watching Duke/NCSU or watching Kansas/Missouri based on which players he has heard of.

Matches
05-10-2018, 09:00 AM
Again, I suggest that this board doesn't represent the average college basketball fan, who turns on the TV in February to see what teams are good and decides between watching Duke/NCSU or watching Kansas/Missouri based on which players he has heard of.

I agree that this board isn't representative of the average fan, but I think the average fan would be LESS likely to follow specific players. I think the average fan doesn't tune in until after the Super Bowl, maybe not even until March, and is way more interested in the laundry than in individual players.

Not to say that having superstars doesn't improve the quality of play, which can drive clicks, interest, etc. even among more casual fans, but I think the denizens of this board are much more likely to know who plays where than someone with a more passing interest in the sport.

Neals384
05-10-2018, 09:50 AM
The comparison to slavery is clearly too much. The crux of the issue is that the NBA and NCAA are monopolies over the labor rules. Better or worse, they make the rules and you live with them or not. If you believe in free market capitalism you say that's simply the market...

in economic terms, the NBA is a cartel - separately owned teams that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for basketball professional talent. In a free market there would be no draft or salary cap, and Wendell would be free to sign with the employer that offers him the best deal. Kinda like everyone else leaving college for the working world.

I can hardly wait for momma's comments on the draft and fee agency!

Acymetric
05-10-2018, 10:07 AM
in economic terms, the NBA is a cartel - separately owned teams that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for basketball professional talent. In a free market there would be no draft or salary cap, and Wendell would be free to sign with the employer that offers him the best deal. Kinda like everyone else leaving college for the working world.

I can hardly wait for momma's comments on the draft and fee agency!

This is pretty much how soccer works in other countries, right?

OZ
05-10-2018, 10:13 AM
in economic terms, the NBA is a cartel - separately owned teams that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for basketball professional talent. In a free market there would be no draft or salary cap, and Wendell would be free to sign with the employer that offers him the best deal. Kinda like everyone else leaving college for the working world.

I can hardly wait for momma's comments on the draft and fee agency!

AND... he will be selected form a lineup of other similar athletes. He will NOT get to choose the team he will play for! That should really set her off.

budwom
05-10-2018, 10:18 AM
I see lots of good comments here, but (and maybe I missed this somewhere in the thread) I am having trouble reconciling Mrs. Carter's thoughts about the current system with the April 12 article written by William Rhoden (good writer) in The Undefeated, in which she thought it would be a good idea if he returned to Duke (Dad felt otherwise). I know returning to Duke and hating the current NCAA/NBA systems are not mutually exclusive, but given Mom's anger about the system, I would have thought she'd want him to move on.

sagegrouse
05-10-2018, 10:23 AM
I agree that this board isn't representative of the average fan, but I think the average fan would be LESS likely to follow specific players. I think the average fan doesn't tune in until after the Super Bowl, maybe not even until March, and is way more interested in the laundry than in individual players.

Not to say that having superstars doesn't improve the quality of play, which can drive clicks, interest, etc. even among more casual fans, but I think the denizens of this board are much more likely to know who plays where than someone with a more passing interest in the sport.

Well, that's the $64 million question. In college, is it the name on the front of the uniform or the name on the back?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-10-2018, 10:32 AM
I agree that this board isn't representative of the average fan, but I think the average fan would be LESS likely to follow specific players. I think the average fan doesn't tune in until after the Super Bowl, maybe not even until March, and is way more interested in the laundry than in individual players.

Not to say that having superstars doesn't improve the quality of play, which can drive clicks, interest, etc. even among more casual fans, but I think the denizens of this board are much more likely to know who plays where than someone with a more passing interest in the sport.

I disagree. I feel like fans who get their information from sports talk radio and ESPN are more likely to be aware of Bagley/Tatum and tune in to watch.

People who are into the team will watch regardless. Fringe fans want to see what the hype is about for these preseason number one teams with hot young talent.

To wit: who do you think more non-Duke fans tuned in to watch - Scheyer or Bagley?

NSDukeFan
05-10-2018, 10:45 AM
I see lots of good comments here, but (and maybe I missed this somewhere in the thread) I am having trouble reconciling Mrs. Carter's thoughts about the current system with the April 12 article written by William Rhoden (good writer) in The Undefeated, in which she thought it would be a good idea if he returned to Duke (Dad felt otherwise). I know returning to Duke and hating the current NCAA/NBA systems are not mutually exclusive, but given Mom's anger about the system, I would have thought she'd want him to move on.

She thought sending him back into slavery, where he at least got to choose his slave owner might have been a better option than having no say in who pays him millions of dollars?

killerleft
05-10-2018, 10:46 AM
I see lots of good comments here, but (and maybe I missed this somewhere in the thread) I am having trouble reconciling Mrs. Carter's thoughts about the current system with the April 12 article written by William Rhoden (good writer) in The Undefeated, in which she thought it would be a good idea if he returned to Duke (Dad felt otherwise). I know returning to Duke and hating the current NCAA/NBA systems are not mutually exclusive, but given Mom's anger about the system, I would have thought she'd want him to move on.

Perhaps she was using reverse psychology on her son. It seemed a little off to me even then.

Jeffrey
05-10-2018, 10:51 AM
I see lots of good comments here, but (and maybe I missed this somewhere in the thread) I am having trouble reconciling Mrs. Carter's thoughts about the current system with the April 12 article written by William Rhoden (good writer) in The Undefeated, in which she thought it would be a good idea if he returned to Duke (Dad felt otherwise). I know returning to Duke and hating the current NCAA/NBA systems are not mutually exclusive, but given Mom's anger about the system, I would have thought she'd want him to move on.

I share your opinion.....

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?41931-Wendell-Carter-s-Mother-Is-Angry&p=1068240#post1068240

Jeffrey
05-10-2018, 10:55 AM
To wit: who do you think more non-Duke fans tuned in to watch - Scheyer or Bagley?

Probably depends on whether their focus was very high basketball I.Q. or talent. IMO, both were a great thrill to watch!

Matches
05-10-2018, 11:28 AM
I disagree. I feel like fans who get their information from sports talk radio and ESPN are more likely to be aware of Bagley/Tatum and tune in to watch.

People who are into the team will watch regardless. Fringe fans want to see what the hype is about for these preseason number one teams with hot young talent.

To wit: who do you think more non-Duke fans tuned in to watch - Scheyer or Bagley?

Bagley, I'd guess - but I don't think the difference is that large. Stepping away from Duke for a moment, I'd wager a LOT of people watched OKL last year to see Young, or LSU a few years back to see Simmons. I don't dispute that a star can drive interest in a particular team. Not sure it translates to the sport as a whole though, except inasmuch as better players = better games.

Put another way - Duke + Bagley > Duke w/o Bagley, but Duke + Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. And I'd bet Duke w/o Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. #math

We may just have different definitions of "casual" though. IMO fringe fans probably don't know or care who was preseason #1.

budwom
05-10-2018, 11:31 AM
I share your opinion....

http://forums.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?41931-Wendell-Carter-s-Mother-Is-Angry&p=1068240#post1068240

Ah, sorry I didn't see that Jeffrey....

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-10-2018, 11:43 AM
Bagley, I'd guess - but I don't think the difference is that large. Stepping away from Duke for a moment, I'd wager a LOT of people watched OKL last year to see Young, or LSU a few years back to see Simmons. I don't dispute that a star can drive interest in a particular team. Not sure it translates to the sport as a whole though, except inasmuch as better players = better games.

Put another way - Duke + Bagley > Duke w/o Bagley, but Duke + Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. And I'd bet Duke w/o Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. #math

We may just have different definitions of "casual" though. IMO fringe fans probably don't know or care who was preseason #1.

I like your comparison.

I also think most of us - myself included - are so far removed from "casual fan" that we can't relate.

Seems most sports talk radio folks mention yearly how "well, since none of you pay any attention to college basketball until the Duke/UNC game, let's tell you what's been happening..."

Pretty far cry from those of us here huddling over recruiting, transfers, preseason exhibitions, and minutes played predictions.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-10-2018, 11:51 AM
Well, that's the $64 million question. In college, is it the name on the front of the uniform or the name on the back?

That's pretty easy question for 64 mill. It's 95% name on the front, if not more.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-10-2018, 11:52 AM
Bagley, I'd guess - but I don't think the difference is that large. Stepping away from Duke for a moment, I'd wager a LOT of people watched OKL last year to see Young, or LSU a few years back to see Simmons. I don't dispute that a star can drive interest in a particular team. Not sure it translates to the sport as a whole though, except inasmuch as better players = better games.

Put another way - Duke + Bagley > Duke w/o Bagley, but Duke + Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. And I'd bet Duke w/o Bagley > Memphis + Bagley. #math


I agree with your math, and add this:
College basketball + Bagley = College basketball - Bagley.
Also, same equation, (insert name here)

sagegrouse
05-10-2018, 12:12 PM
I disagree. I feel like fans who get their information from sports talk radio and ESPN are more likely to be aware of Bagley/Tatum and tune in to watch.

People who are into the team will watch regardless. Fringe fans want to see what the hype is about for these preseason number one teams with hot young talent.

To wit: who do you think more non-Duke fans tuned in to watch - Scheyer or Bagley?

Fair enough. But how about Heyman, Verga, Gminski, Gene Banks, Ferry, Laettner, Grant Hill, Elton Brand, JJ vs. Bagley. I suspect one-and-done diminishes the value of the names on the back of the jerseys.

Duke79UNLV77
05-10-2018, 12:14 PM
I disagree. I feel like fans who get their information from sports talk radio and ESPN are more likely to be aware of Bagley/Tatum and tune in to watch.

People who are into the team will watch regardless. Fringe fans want to see what the hype is about for these preseason number one teams with hot young talent.

To wit: who do you think more non-Duke fans tuned in to watch - Scheyer or Bagley?

I would say more non-Duke fans watched Scheyer in the Final Four and National Championship game than watched Bagley in any game. I'd also say that Bagley's games this year had easily higher ratings than Simmons' games at LSU or Fultz's at Washington, because more non-Duke fans still tune in to watch Duke than to watch individual players, with exciting players being a bonus.

Jeffrey
05-10-2018, 12:49 PM
Fair enough. But how about Heyman, Verga, Gminski, Gene Banks, Ferry, Laettner, Grant Hill, Elton Brand, JJ vs. Bagley. I suspect one-and-done diminishes the value of the names on the back of the jerseys.

I strongly agree and believe it makes it safe to say Laettner will continue to be Duke's GOAT and David Thompson will continue to be the ACC's GOAT.

Mrs. Carter, David Thompson's problems were not possible until the NBA/ABA dollars appeared. Skipping N.C. State may not have been in Thompson's best interest.

Jeffrey
05-10-2018, 12:58 PM
Ah, sorry I didn't see that Jeffrey...

I'm always pleased to see we agree. It means I might actually be right. My wife says I'm extremely overdue!

Turk
05-10-2018, 05:15 PM
in economic terms, the NBA is a cartel - separately owned teams that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for basketball professional talent. In a free market there would be no draft or salary cap, and Wendell would be free to sign with the employer that offers him the best deal. Kinda like everyone else leaving college for the working world.


I think this is spot-on, let us follow a bit further. In economic terms, the NBA is a cartel - separately owned teams that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for basketball professional talent. Those who are not drafted are free to sign with the employer that offers him the best deal. To balance the power of the NBA cartel, the employees of the NBA won the right to organize for the purposes of collective bargaining. The players' union and the owners have compromised to grow their market and share revenues (in the form of cash money) according to a transparent formula that is open for re-negotiation by both parties on a regular basis. The NBA is flourishing, growing internationally, and is healthier than the other three major American sports.

The NCAA is also a cartel - independent institutions that conspire to restrain a market - in this case, the market for scholarships. Despite the massive revenue the cartel generates, they have been successful in keeping 100% of the revenue, by paying those who generate it a tiny fraction in a non-cash form. To add insult to injury, the cartel establishes draconian restraint-of-trade restrictions on its "student-employees" that could never be legally applied to their fellow classmates, even those receiving full non-athletic scholarships. Some of these are infamous, such as the "bagel rule", the "charity calendar" rule, the "You-Tube channel" rule, just to name a few. Those who dislike this system are told "take it or leave it", with no ability to negotiate a better deal. The NCAA is rife with corruption, arbitrary and punitive enforcement, and is the object of ridicule, while schools continue to cheat and players take money under the table.

As for the question about which name on the jersey matters more, it's clearly the name on the front, whether it's Duke / unc, or Celtics / Sixers. Seinfeld said it best when he said, "We're just rooting for laundry." In the NBA, the players get paid cash money. In the NCAA, the players get paid in magic beans.

MartyClark
05-10-2018, 05:53 PM
I was a bit critical of Wendell's mom in a couple of earlier posts. No need to repeat my thoughts but some of you moderated my view a tiny bit.

I think back to some of the stuff I said decades ago and now wonder what the heck I was thinking.

I'd be very curious to see Wendell's mom's view of things in five or ten years. She may have a different view or, perhaps, express her views in a different way.

At any rate, I wish Wendell and his family great success.

(I'm trying to be kinder and less judgmental as I get older. Every once in a while I succeed.)

RPS
05-10-2018, 07:29 PM
I kept quiet as long as I could. Every single time this issue comes up I am shocked at how few here see the NCAA as the disgusting and exploitive cartel that it is (and that I think it so obviously is).

Full disclosure for those who don't recall: My younger son was a D1 revenue sport athlete in a power conference at a school with a pristine academic reputation (e.g., 33 students and 38 faculty from there have won Nobel prizes). He started as a true freshman and was a pro prospect before injury ended his career. Fortunately, he was also a very good student, graduated in three years with highest honors, got a full ride to graduate school at Georgetown and now has a great career. Every single thing about his college experience was great except for athletics. Every single thing about his athletics experience was exploitive.

Every. Single. Thing.


I'd be very curious to see Wendell's mom's view of things in five or ten years. She may have a different view or, perhaps, express her views in a different way.My son graduated from college almost exactly seven years ago. I hate the NCAA and the system of college athletics now more than ever. And I have hated them the whole time.

After many discussions on this subject over the years I have concluded that because fans would “love to be exploited” in this way and desperately wish they could have played at that level, they think the players should look at it the way they do. But they only see the glory. They don't have to live it. As great as the good stuff can be, the system stinks to high heaven. In related news, I am also shocked that in labor disputes in sports, fans reflexively support the billionaire owners over the (still rich) players – I suspect the thinking is similar.

The NCAA is a “charity” that makes billions of dollars yet gets labor for (essentially) free. The list price may range from $15-60,000 per year or so, but the actual cost to the schools is minimal. It has so much free cash flow to throw around that bowl game officials earn seven figures for putting on one mediocre game per year in front of a half-full stadium and a failed coach at the highest level (Nick Saban) earns more money at a lower level than every coach at the highest level but one (Bill Belichick).

If you think players are often true students I have some marshland in Florida to sell you. The system is set up to make that hard. They are routinely encouraged to take easy (or easier) courses and majors and have to cram classes into a tiny time window. Despite rules limiting practice time, schedules are creatively managed so players regularly spend 50-60 hours per week “on the job.”

Players are not allowed to market their likenesses and schools are not allowed to either. Funny how jerseys with the numbers of the best and most popular players are always prominently displayed and offered for sale in bulk. Schools can sell (almost) anybody a jersey with their own name on it but I couldn’t buy a jersey with my name on it because my son (the player) shared my last name.

We all love college sports. I get it. As much as I hate the NCAA I still love Duke sports. I didn’t miss a single home basketball game as a student. But the NCAA is still disgusting. Don’t you think it’s instructive that (at least in my experience) overwhelming majorities of players and their parents resent the system?

The system needs to be blown up.

UrinalCake
05-10-2018, 08:06 PM
I've had some time to digest this news, and want to raise a couple points:

- While at first glance it seems like Mrs. Carter has contradicted herself by criticizing the system while also saying that Wendell has benefited from it and should have returned for his sophomore year, my personal take is that she thinks her son's situation is somewhat unique and not representative of the typical college basketball player. And she's right - she and her husband were both college athletes, her husband played professionally, they are a wealthy and educated family and have the resources to understand the system better than just about anyone else. So when she talks about kids being forced into the college basketball system because there aren't any other options, and then being stuck inside it, I think she's referring to the more typical case of a basketball player who doesn't have all of these resources.

- There's a pretty good article up on The Athletic in which three prominent people who oppose paying players are interviewed. I won't share all the details but will point out that two of them also make a loose comparison of the college basketball system to slavery. Len Elmore describes going through the recruiting process and being offered money and feeling like he was "being bought and sold again." So Mrs. Carter is not the only person to draw this analogy, poor as it may be.

weezie
05-10-2018, 08:52 PM
I kept quiet as long as I could. Every single time this issue comes up I am shocked at how few here see the NCAA as the disgusting and exploitive cartel that it is (and that I think it so obviously is)...

The system needs to be blown up.

GREAT post! I hope everybody here reads it in entirety.

chris13
05-10-2018, 09:30 PM
I kept quiet as long as I could. Every single time this issue comes up I am shocked at how few here see the NCAA as the disgusting and exploitive cartel that it is (and that I think it so obviously is).

Full disclosure for those who don't recall: My younger son was a D1 revenue sport athlete in a power conference at a school with a pristine academic reputation (e.g., 33 students and 38 faculty from there have won Nobel prizes). He started as a true freshman and was a pro prospect before injury ended his career. Fortunately, he was also a very good student, graduated in three years with highest honors, got a full ride to graduate school at Georgetown and now has a great career. Every single thing about his college experience was great except for athletics. Every single thing about his athletics experience was exploitive.

Every. Single. Thing.

My son graduated from college almost exactly seven years ago. I hate the NCAA and the system of college athletics now more than ever. And I have hated them the whole time.

After many discussions on this subject over the years I have concluded that because fans would “love to be exploited” in this way and desperately wish they could have played at that level, they think the players should look at it the way they do. But they only see the glory. They don't have to live it. As great as the good stuff can be, the system stinks to high heaven. In related news, I am also shocked that in labor disputes in sports, fans reflexively support the billionaire owners over the (still rich) players – I suspect the thinking is similar.

The NCAA is a “charity” that makes billions of dollars yet gets labor for (essentially) free. The list price may range from $15-60,000 per year or so, but the actual cost to the schools is minimal. It has so much free cash flow to throw around that bowl game officials earn seven figures for putting on one mediocre game per year in front of a half-full stadium and a failed coach at the highest level (Nick Saban) earns more money at a lower level than every coach at the highest level but one (Bill Belichick).

If you think players are often true students I have some marshland in Florida to sell you. The system is set up to make that hard. They are routinely encouraged to take easy (or easier) courses and majors and have to cram classes into a tiny time window. Despite rules limiting practice time, schedules are creatively managed so players regularly spend 50-60 hours per week “on the job.”

Players are not allowed to market their likenesses and schools are not allowed to either. Funny how jerseys with the numbers of the best and most popular players are always prominently displayed and offered for sale in bulk. Schools can sell (almost) anybody a jersey with their own name on it but I couldn’t buy a jersey with my name on it because my son (the player) shared my last name.

We all love college sports. I get it. As much as I hate the NCAA I still love Duke sports. I didn’t miss a single home basketball game as a student. But the NCAA is still disgusting. Don’t you think it’s instructive that (at least in my experience) overwhelming majorities of players and their parents resent the system?

The system needs to be blown up.

I’m so glad you weighed in. I would note that both you and Mrs. Carter have first hand experience with having children who played division 1 revenue sports. I weigh your opinions on this subject higher because of that first hand experience.

And also while Division 1 athletics is not slavery if players were paid the distribution of money would move away money from predominantly white coaches and administrators would go to predominantly black athletes.

Mrs. Carter’s statement is worth reading in full.

https://deadspin.com/kylia-carters-speech-against-the-ncaa-model-got-right-t-1825826893

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-10-2018, 09:38 PM
I’m so glad you weighed in. I would note that both you and Mrs. Carter have first hand experience with having children who played division 1 revenue sports. I weigh your opinions on this subject higher because of that first hand experience.

And also while Division 1 athletics is not slavery if players were paid the distribution of money would move away money from predominantly white coaches and administrators would go to predominantly black athletes.

Mrs. Carter’s statement is worth reading in full.

It is impossible to ignore the racial undertones. Especially given these particular comments. Which is why as a white man who did not play D1 with no children, I am hesitant to criticize a black woman with a child in this situation for her comments. I will now bow out of this thread.

OldPhiKap
05-10-2018, 10:06 PM
I have largely ignored this thread, and no disrespect to the OP — but PLEASE change the title to this thread.

Thanks.

lotusland
05-11-2018, 05:02 AM
I kept quiet as long as I could. Every single time this issue comes up I am shocked at how few here see the NCAA as the disgusting and exploitive cartel that it is (and that I think it so obviously is).

Full disclosure for those who don't recall: My younger son was a D1 revenue sport athlete in a power conference at a school with a pristine academic reputation (e.g., 33 students and 38 faculty from there have won Nobel prizes). He started as a true freshman and was a pro prospect before injury ended his career. Fortunately, he was also a very good student, graduated in three years with highest honors, got a full ride to graduate school at Georgetown and now has a great career. Every single thing about his college experience was great except for athletics. Every single thing about his athletics experience was exploitive.

Every. Single. Thing.

My son graduated from college almost exactly seven years ago. I hate the NCAA and the system of college athletics now more than ever. And I have hated them the whole time.

After many discussions on this subject over the years I have concluded that because fans would “love to be exploited” in this way and desperately wish they could have played at that level, they think the players should look at it the way they do. But they only see the glory. They don't have to live it. As great as the good stuff can be, the system stinks to high heaven. In related news, I am also shocked that in labor disputes in sports, fans reflexively support the billionaire owners over the (still rich) players – I suspect the thinking is similar.

The NCAA is a “charity” that makes billions of dollars yet gets labor for (essentially) free. The list price may range from $15-60,000 per year or so, but the actual cost to the schools is minimal. It has so much free cash flow to throw around that bowl game officials earn seven figures for putting on one mediocre game per year in front of a half-full stadium and a failed coach at the highest level (Nick Saban) earns more money at a lower level than every coach at the highest level but one (Bill Belichick).

If you think players are often true students I have some marshland in Florida to sell you. The system is set up to make that hard. They are routinely encouraged to take easy (or easier) courses and majors and have to cram classes into a tiny time window. Despite rules limiting practice time, schedules are creatively managed so players regularly spend 50-60 hours per week “on the job.”

Players are not allowed to market their likenesses and schools are not allowed to either. Funny how jerseys with the numbers of the best and most popular players are always prominently displayed and offered for sale in bulk. Schools can sell (almost) anybody a jersey with their own name on it but I couldn’t buy a jersey with my name on it because my son (the player) shared my last name.

We all love college sports. I get it. As much as I hate the NCAA I still love Duke sports. I didn’t miss a single home basketball game as a student. But the NCAA is still disgusting. Don’t you think it’s instructive that (at least in my experience) overwhelming majorities of players and their parents resent the system?

The system needs to be blown up.

I wonder what will be left after the explosion? The argument to pay players always centers around the amount of money made. It seems like the alternative would be more like basketball leagues that don’t make a lot of money. That is a professional league with mostly less than NBA talent. Will it be ok for players not to make boatloads of money when the games actually don’t make money? Is that better?

WillJ
05-11-2018, 07:07 AM
I have a few views that, what with me being an economist, will probably strike others as eccentric, but here goes:

1. It's the NBA *and* it's players' association that have conspired to keep star freshman bball players in school. The NBA players association has consistently sold out future stars, who don't have a place at the bargaining table, by keeping down star rookie's salaries and by restricting entry. This happens in lots of union bargaining situations, where the easiest place for union and management to agree on is that current employees and owners should benefit at the expense of future employees.

2. If there were something resembling a free market for NCAA basketball players, it would not result in every player getting the same salary. Rather, players like Marvin Bagley and Wendell Carter - and most other players at Duke, Kentucky, etc. - would get a big pay raise, but other players would get paid next to nothing....they might not even get a scholarship. There are lots of scholarship benchwarmers, especially on low-revenue teams outside of the power conferences - whose market value would be close to zero. So, in asking for a free market for college basketball players, let's not assume that the expected transfer from schools to players would be even remotely even across players. it wouldn't.

3. I am not a student of athletic department finances, but my impression is that there is enormous cross-subsidies across sports, particularly from men's basketball and football towards other sports. Putting those sports on a free market basis would greatly limit those cross-subsidies, with the result, I think, that there would be far fewer intercollegiate sports teams that provide scholarships. I, for one, would not mind that a bit, as I see no reason why Duke should provide, as an example, scholarships in tennis (my sport, FWIW), but others might feel differently

4. It's not at all clear how a free market would divide college sports revenues between players and schools. People often say that they "root for laundry," i.e., that they root for the uniform, and there is definitely some truth to that. Good players clearly add value that would be bid up and rewarded, but school identities also add value. How many people attend or watch G-league games, for example, when the quality of play in those games is generally much better than that in even the best NCAA games? Would Duke find it in its interest to play Wendell Carter $1 million if Duke fans like us would be nearly as happy to watch a less talented player playing in a Duke uniform. I don't know...clearly Wendell Carter was underpaid from this perspective, but I do not know what his market value would have been.

5. It's definitely unseemly when college coaches are getting paid millions of dollars a year when their players are getting much less. I think that any move to a free market would likely result in a much reduced salary for people like Nick Saban and Coach K. We should not, however, understate the value that would be created for schools by star coaches in a free market economy. Coaches would still need to recruit, coach and market the program, and given the current revenues generated by those programs, the good ones are going to get a significant cut. Alabama's athletic department brought in $175 million in revenue last year, and that's probably an understatement of the value of the FB program when you consider its effect on alumni loyalty and giving. That $175 million is in the same ballpark as what an NBA team's annual revenue is....it is not surprising that their star coaches get paid in roughly the same ballpark.

Channing
05-11-2018, 08:15 AM
I kept quiet as long as I could. Every single time this issue comes up I am shocked at how few here see the NCAA as the disgusting and exploitive cartel that it is (and that I think it so obviously is).

Full disclosure for those who don't recall: My younger son was a D1 revenue sport athlete in a power conference at a school with a pristine academic reputation (e.g., 33 students and 38 faculty from there have won Nobel prizes). He started as a true freshman and was a pro prospect before injury ended his career. Fortunately, he was also a very good student, graduated in three years with highest honors, got a full ride to graduate school at Georgetown and now has a great career. Every single thing about his college experience was great except for athletics. Every single thing about his athletics experience was exploitive.

Every. Single. Thing.

My son graduated from college almost exactly seven years ago. I hate the NCAA and the system of college athletics now more than ever. And I have hated them the whole time.

After many discussions on this subject over the years I have concluded that because fans would “love to be exploited” in this way and desperately wish they could have played at that level, they think the players should look at it the way they do. But they only see the glory. They don't have to live it. As great as the good stuff can be, the system stinks to high heaven. In related news, I am also shocked that in labor disputes in sports, fans reflexively support the billionaire owners over the (still rich) players – I suspect the thinking is similar.

The NCAA is a “charity” that makes billions of dollars yet gets labor for (essentially) free. The list price may range from $15-60,000 per year or so, but the actual cost to the schools is minimal. It has so much free cash flow to throw around that bowl game officials earn seven figures for putting on one mediocre game per year in front of a half-full stadium and a failed coach at the highest level (Nick Saban) earns more money at a lower level than every coach at the highest level but one (Bill Belichick).

If you think players are often true students I have some marshland in Florida to sell you. The system is set up to make that hard. They are routinely encouraged to take easy (or easier) courses and majors and have to cram classes into a tiny time window. Despite rules limiting practice time, schedules are creatively managed so players regularly spend 50-60 hours per week “on the job.”

Players are not allowed to market their likenesses and schools are not allowed to either. Funny how jerseys with the numbers of the best and most popular players are always prominently displayed and offered for sale in bulk. Schools can sell (almost) anybody a jersey with their own name on it but I couldn’t buy a jersey with my name on it because my son (the player) shared my last name.

We all love college sports. I get it. As much as I hate the NCAA I still love Duke sports. I didn’t miss a single home basketball game as a student. But the NCAA is still disgusting. Don’t you think it’s instructive that (at least in my experience) overwhelming majorities of players and their parents resent the system?

The system needs to be blown up.

Isn't the alternative that your son didn't need to play division I athletics? He could have gone to college as a student and paid his own way. He could have gone to an NAIA school on scholarship and still had rigorous practice schedules, but perhaps not as rigorous as DI. I did not play DI but I have a lot of friends who played revenue DI sports in Power 5 conferences and a few who played professionally (both domestically and abroad). A few did not enjoy the athlete's life and, by and large, they decided to quit after a year or two. The balance enjoyed and appreciated both their education, their sport, and the connections and doors that have been opened. I shared this thread with 4 of those friends and they all share my view that Ms. Carter's comments (and anyone else who equates college sports to slavery) is ridiculous and demeaning to people who actually have to deal with forced servitude.

Channing
05-11-2018, 08:19 AM
I've had some time to digest this news, and want to raise a couple points:

- While at first glance it seems like Mrs. Carter has contradicted herself by criticizing the system while also saying that Wendell has benefited from it and should have returned for his sophomore year, my personal take is that she thinks her son's situation is somewhat unique and not representative of the typical college basketball player. And she's right - she and her husband were both college athletes, her husband played professionally, they are a wealthy and educated family and have the resources to understand the system better than just about anyone else. So when she talks about kids being forced into the college basketball system because there aren't any other options, and then being stuck inside it, I think she's referring to the more typical case of a basketball player who doesn't have all of these resources.

- There's a pretty good article up on The Athletic in which three prominent people who oppose paying players are interviewed. I won't share all the details but will point out that two of them also make a loose comparison of the college basketball system to slavery. Len Elmore describes going through the recruiting process and being offered money and feeling like he was "being bought and sold again." So Mrs. Carter is not the only person to draw this analogy, poor as it may be.

How can a choice be slavery? As someone else noted, if being recruited and wooed by colleges is akin to slavery, Ms. Carter is going to have real problems with the draft where teams are lobbying to own the rights to her son.

Anyone who downplays, in any respect, the horrors of real slavery by equating it with D1 sports loses all credibility instantly. Again, to restate the absolute obvious, nobody forces anyone to play D1. There are plenty of options available, including NOT PLAYING BASKETBALL. If (in this case) Wendell thinks it would be good for his career to play at Duke (rather than G league or overseas or just training for the year) then there is a quid pro quo. He gets exposure and training and the school gets him on the team.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-11-2018, 09:00 AM
How can a choice be slavery? As someone else noted, if being recruited and wooed by colleges is akin to slavery, Ms. Carter is going to have real problems with the draft where teams are lobbying to own the rights to her son.

Anyone who downplays, in any respect, the horrors of real slavery by equating it with D1 sports loses all credibility instantly. Again, to restate the absolute obvious, nobody forces anyone to play D1. There are plenty of options available, including NOT PLAYING BASKETBALL. If (in this case) Wendell thinks it would be good for his career to play at Duke (rather than G league or overseas or just training for the year) then there is a quid pro quo. He gets exposure and training and the school gets him on the team.

Amen to all of this.....it's funny how some debate this in a fantasy world. Being a D1 athletes is a great situation, period. Now, if people want to argue it should be even greater due to the revenues, fine, make that argument - but this desk pounding about slavery and cartels and so on is absurd, and I think demonstrates an inherent weakness in their case.

I also love the 'blow it all up' crowd. Okay, fine...blow it up.....and then you might not have big revenues for either the players, the coaches, the arenas, the non revenue sports, etc. If anyone thinks the fan interest is guaranteed to stay the same with a "blown up system" that ends up changing the entire nature of the game, I think they're deceived.

This would be kind of funny (and NOT funny). Blow up the system so that there is no 'exploitation' - and as a result, end up with far fewer revenues to spread around. I'd say to all those soccer parents who run around the country every weekend for their 13 year old daughter in hopes she gets a soccer scholarship? Don't count on that being there in a few years if college FB and BB are blown up.

UrinalCake
05-11-2018, 09:17 AM
How can a choice be slavery? As someone else noted, if being recruited and wooed by colleges is akin to slavery, Ms. Carter is going to have real problems with the draft where teams are lobbying to own the rights to her son.

I’m not an African American, so it’s not really my place to decide what a person can or can’t say about slavery. If a black person says that a situation reminds them of slavery, then who am I to tell them that they are wrong?

Also I have not read the whole transcript of Mrs. Carter’s speech but from what I did see, what she said is that the last institution in which white people profited off of blacks and the labor was not paid was slavery. She didn’t say that basketball was the same thing as slavery or that it was as bad.

Jeffrey
05-11-2018, 09:40 AM
what she said is that the last institution in which white people profited off of blacks and the labor was not paid was slavery.

IMO, great progress was made when blacks were given an equal opportunity to play college hoops. Now we are going to complain most great players are black? Would we care if most great players were still white?

Many years ago, white people profited off of whites and the labor was not paid. Was that slavery?

IMO, the true issue is not race, slavery, etc. The true issue is the NBA's OAD rule combined with the very substantial increases in NBA revenue and salaries.

ChillinDuke
05-11-2018, 10:01 AM
I don't really want to participate in this thread, because it is essentially an echo chamber.

But I will say one thing. It disturbs me when people approach optional situations as if it is their inherent right and obligation, just because they are good at something. Playing basketball is a privilege, not a requirement. Comparing playing basketball to slavery, whether explicit or not, whether institutionally or not, in or out of context, seems very irresponsible to me, regardless of who makes the comparison.

Everyone has an inherent right to speak their mind, though, however irresponsible I may view it.

- Chillin

Bluedog
05-11-2018, 10:55 AM
This would be kind of funny (and NOT funny). Blow up the system so that there is no 'exploitation' - and as a result, end up with far fewer revenues to spread around.

Kinda like how the O'Bannon suit got rid of EA Sports college video games. I understand the rationale and decision, but I know that players thought it was at least "cool" they could play video games with themselves as players and now those video games don't exist.

Acymetric
05-11-2018, 10:59 AM
Kinda like how the O'Bannon suit got rid of EA Sports college video games. I understand the rationale and decision, but I know that players thought it was at least "cool" they could play video games with themselves as players and now those video games don't exist.

I really do miss the NCAA Football games. I've never played Madden, but after years of either playing NCAA Football '12 or not playing at all, I kind of have the video game football itch again.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-11-2018, 12:22 PM
Kinda like how the O'Bannon suit got rid of EA Sports college video games. I understand the rationale and decision, but I know that players thought it was at least "cool" they could play video games with themselves as players and now those video games don't exist.

Yep, all it did was end a perceived injustice, not a real one - and didn't do a single person any good - except for the lawyers who litigated it. No body else got any benefit whatsoever.

Yeah, let's blow it up....that'll work out great.

Channing
05-11-2018, 12:32 PM
I’m not an African American, so it’s not really my place to decide what a person can or can’t say about slavery. If a black person says that a situation reminds them of slavery, then who am I to tell them that they are wrong?

Also I have not read the whole transcript of Mrs. Carter’s speech but from what I did see, what she said is that the last institution in which white people profited off of blacks and the labor was not paid was slavery. She didn’t say that basketball was the same thing as slavery or that it was as bad.

African Americans are not the only group of people to suffer the atrocity of slavery. The very heavy inference (if not direct explicit statement) by Ms. Carter is that the NCAA is akin to slavery. It is irresponsible to use any sort of pulpit to make that inference.

I happen to be Jewish. It would be unbelievably wrongheaded, irresponsible, and wrong for me to even remotely hint at the fact that playing division I basketball is akin, in even the slightest way, to the treatment of the Jews during the Holocaust. Just because one isn't part of a group that suffered doesn't preclude that person from making a rational statement.

Turk
05-11-2018, 01:01 PM
Amen to all of this...it's funny how some debate this in a fantasy world. Being a D1 athletes is a great situation, period. Now, if people want to argue it should be even greater due to the revenues, fine, make that argument - but this desk pounding about slavery and cartels and so on is absurd, and I think demonstrates an inherent weakness in their case.

I also love the 'blow it all up' crowd. Okay, fine...blow it up...and then you might not have big revenues for either the players, the coaches, the arenas, the non revenue sports, etc. If anyone thinks the fan interest is guaranteed to stay the same with a "blown up system" that ends up changing the entire nature of the game, I think they're deceived.

This would be kind of funny (and NOT funny). Blow up the system so that there is no 'exploitation' - and as a result, end up with far fewer revenues to spread around. I'd say to all those soccer parents who run around the country every weekend for their 13 year old daughter in hopes she gets a soccer scholarship? Don't count on that being there in a few years if college FB and BB are blown up.

OK, I'll have a go.

1. Being a D1 athlete should be an even greater situation in the revenue sports because there's plenty of money to go around. Start with this Slate piece: Nonprofit "amateur" sports (https://slate.com/business/2018/05/the-big-ten-ncaa-pac-12-and-other-conferences-are-insanely-lucrative.html)

2. Let's be clear about what we're blowing up: it's the myth of the "student-athlete" in the revenue sports and the dinosaur attitudes of the NCAA. For example, for decades the NCAA insisted that the only "compensation" the players could receive was tuition, room, and board, and that any "true-cost-of-attendance" stipend would constitute "pay for play". Over strenuous opposition, the power conferences agreed to provide additional benefits such as the cash stipend a couple years back. Guess what, the world is still spinning. No sports got cut, scholarships dropped, or TV contracts torn up. Most people didn't even notice. With a little time and effort, it would be possible to devise a system where some revenue-sharing could take place.

"Indentured" by Joe Posnanski and Ben Strauss (https://www.amazon.com/Indentured-Battle-Exploitation-College-Athletes/dp/0143130552/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1526058918&sr=1-1-fkmr1&keywords=ncaa+joe+posnanski)

What rankles me most about the NCAA is its pure greed and hypocrisy. I'm also getting tired of the "take it or leave it" stance of people who prefer the status quo, as if this was the best or only possible way college athletics should work.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-11-2018, 01:20 PM
OK, I'll have a go.

1. Being a D1 athlete should be an even greater situation in the revenue sports because there's plenty of money to go around. Start with this Slate piece: Nonprofit "amateur" sports (https://slate.com/business/2018/05/the-big-ten-ncaa-pac-12-and-other-conferences-are-insanely-lucrative.html)

2. Let's be clear about what we're blowing up: it's the myth of the "student-athlete" in the revenue sports and the dinosaur attitudes of the NCAA. For example, for decades the NCAA insisted that the only "compensation" the players could receive was tuition, room, and board, and that any "true-cost-of-attendance" stipend would constitute "pay for play". Over strenuous opposition, the power conferences agreed to provide additional benefits such as the cash stipend a couple years back. Guess what, the world is still spinning. No sports got cut, scholarships dropped, or TV contracts torn up. Most people didn't even notice. With a little time and effort, it would be possible to devise a system where some revenue-sharing could take place.

"Indentured" by Joe Posnanski and Ben Strauss (https://www.amazon.com/Indentured-Battle-Exploitation-College-Athletes/dp/0143130552/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1526058918&sr=1-1-fkmr1&keywords=ncaa+joe+posnanski)

What rankles me most about the NCAA is its pure greed and hypocrisy. I'm also getting tired of the "take it or leave it" stance of people who prefer the status quo, as if this was the best or only possible way college athletics should work.

Hmmm, few problems there.
First, the assumption that "there is enough money to go around" is simply not true for most athletic departments. Simply not true, unless you really cut back on coaches, facilities, non rev sports, etc. If you want to do that, fine, make the case, but simply saying there is enough money to go around is not true.

Second, the dinosaur of the NCAA is a valid point, but acting like things haven't improved "dramatically in the last four years" according to K is to drag out a dinosaur that is mostly extinct. This is proven by the fact of the cash stipend, and the 55 million dollar athletes complex at Clemson, etc. But please, don't pretend that those of us warning about player pay were against the stipend or defending the NCAA.

And again, I don't think anyone is saying pure "take it or leave it." But I would caution, be careful what you ask for. Ask Ed O'Bannon how that worked out.

And I cannot stand the NCAA for a number of reasons, but when you say the NCAA is greedy, are you indicating that they are simply filling up silos of cash out there in Kansas at HQ? Or is that money being used for college sports?

Indoor66
05-11-2018, 01:26 PM
And I cannot stand the NCAA for a number of reasons, but when you say the NCAA is greedy, are you indicating that they are simply filling up silos of cash out there in Kansas at HQ? Or is that money being used for college sports?

I think the silo is in Indianapolis now.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-11-2018, 01:29 PM
Hmmm, few problems there.
First, the assumption that "there is enough money to go around" is simply not true for most athletic departments. Simply not true, unless you really cut back on coaches, facilities, non rev sports, etc. If you want to do that, fine, make the case, but simply saying there is enough money to go around is not true.



Coach K earned 9 million last year. I suspect there is a little wiggle room in the budget.

RPS
05-11-2018, 02:01 PM
Coach K earned 9 million last year. I suspect there is a little wiggle room in the budget.That Ohio State's basketball coach is paid significantly more than Gregg Popovich, Steve Kerr or Brad Stevens is proof positive that college sports have a ton of "extra" money. Not having to pay for labor will do that. In what other industries do mediocre leaders at lower levels get paid more than the best leaders at the highest level?

chrishoke
05-11-2018, 02:48 PM
Coach K earned 9 million last year. I suspect there is a little wiggle room in the budget.

I nominate you to carry that message to Coach K. :D

ChillinDuke
05-11-2018, 03:06 PM
That Ohio State's basketball coach is paid significantly more than Gregg Popovich, Steve Kerr or Brad Stevens is proof positive that college sports have a ton of "extra" money. Not having to pay for labor will do that. In what other industries do mediocre leaders at lower levels get paid more than the best leaders at the highest level?

Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence.

The bolded sentence is purely opinion and simply does nothing to further the conversation. Although, to be fair, there's probably no conversation to further, as we've beaten this one so thin you could probably bread it and make it into milanese.

- Chillin

MartyClark
05-11-2018, 03:19 PM
[QUOTE=ChillinDuke;1068807]Objection! Assumes facts not in evidence.

The bolded sentence is purely opinion and simply does nothing to further the conversation. Although, to be fair, there's probably no conversation to further, as we've beaten this one so thin you could probably bread it and make it into milanese.



I'm ready for some veal Milanese after a tough week. Good luck to Wendell and his mother. I'd love to meet either or both of them and explore their thoughts on this.

RPS
05-11-2018, 03:45 PM
The bolded sentence is purely opinion and simply does nothing to further the conversation.That's your opinion.

Besides, the bolded sentence is a question. That said, does anyone honestly question that Popovich, Kerr and Stevens are better basketball coaches than Chris Holtmann? That Holtmann is paid substantially more than they are is not in dispute. That the NBA is the higher/tougher level is not in dispute (unless you think our beloved Devils could compete in the NBA). If you don't like this proof for college sports having "too much" money, maybe you'll consider the Texas locker room -- 126 lockers at $8,700 per (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/longhorns/article/Texas-raises-the-ante-with-revamped-locker-room-11738258.php) with 37" televisions for each one, or $57 million (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2017/07/06/colleges-spending-more-their-athletes-because-they-can/449433001/) in facilities "improvements" at Texas A&M. How about this one (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/16/universities-spend-more-athletics-athlete-academics-student-report-finds): "Division I universities and colleges tended to spend roughly three to six times as much on athletics per athlete as on academics per student, with the ratio exceeding 12 times in the Southeastern Conference" (research here (https://deltacostproject.org)).

As noted above, I love Duke sports and college sports in general, but is there any rational conclusion here other than "This is crazy"?

Troublemaker
05-11-2018, 04:04 PM
That Holtmann is paid substantially more than they are is not in dispute.

Actually, it is in dispute (http://www.cleveland.com/osu/2018/02/no_chris_holtmann_is_not_the_t.html). Holtmann's salary is actually much less; the report erroneously counted his buyout as part of his salary, i.e. the buyout money actually goes to Butler University, not to Holtmann.

I'm not too fond of the Nick Saban example, either. He spent all of two seasons in the NFL and his QBs for those two seasons were Gus Frerotte and Joey Harrington.

I think you may have a point in there, an interesting one, but I'd select different examples to demonstrate your point.

RPS
05-11-2018, 04:14 PM
I think you may have a point in there, an interesting one, but I'd select different examples to demonstrate your point.Okay. Do you dispute that John Calipari is a failed NBA coach? He was 72-112, was 3-17 in the season when he was fired and never won a playoff game. But he's a college Hall-of-Famer who makes $8mm per year, substantially more than Popovich, Kerr or Stevens.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-11-2018, 04:19 PM
There's a lot of money floating around revenue college sports. To pretend there isn't enough to share with athletes is wildly disingenuous.

Troublemaker
05-11-2018, 04:26 PM
Okay. Do you dispute that John Calipari is a failed NBA coach? He was 72-112, was 3-17 in the season when he was fired and never won a playoff game. But he's a college Hall-of-Famer who makes $8mm per year, substantially more than Popovich, Kerr or Stevens.

Okay, I think you're on a better track now, but now we encounter a different problem: the underlying assumption that the two jobs are the same with the same skillsets.

Did you know that Gregg Popovich coached in college at Pomona-Fitzer and had a very mediocre record? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregg_Popovich#College) I mean, Pop was almost completely unable to gain any traction for that program in his 8 seasons there:


https://i.imgur.com/FDO8tXy.png


So, yes, while I doubt that Calipari could've won 5 championships with the Spurs, I'm not so sure Pop -- were he a college coach -- would be able to walk into teenagers' living rooms and kiss their butts and their parents' butts to get them to come to his program.

It's quite possible that Pop is a better NBA coach than Cal, and Cal is a better college coach than Pop.

camion
05-11-2018, 04:42 PM
So, yes, while I doubt that Calipari could've won 5 championships with the Spurs, I'm not so sure Pop -- were he a college coach -- would be able to walk into teenagers' living rooms and kiss their butts and their parents' butts to get them to come to his program.

It's quite possible that Pop is a better NBA coach than Cal, and Cal is a better college coach than Pop.


Yes, and IMhO while the skillsets needed for success in the NBA and NCAA may overlap they are nowhere nearly identical.

rsvman
05-11-2018, 04:56 PM
That's your opinion.

Besides, the bolded sentence is a question. That said, does anyone honestly question that Popovich, Kerr and Stevens are better basketball coaches than Chris Holtmann? That Holtmann is paid substantially more than they are is not in dispute. That the NBA is the higher/tougher level is not in dispute (unless you think our beloved Devils could compete in the NBA). If you don't like this proof for college sports having "too much" money, maybe you'll consider the Texas locker room -- 126 lockers at $8,700 per (https://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/longhorns/article/Texas-raises-the-ante-with-revamped-locker-room-11738258.php) with 37" televisions for each one, or $57 million (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2017/07/06/colleges-spending-more-their-athletes-because-they-can/449433001/) in facilities "improvements" at Texas A&M. How about this one (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/01/16/universities-spend-more-athletics-athlete-academics-student-report-finds): "Division I universities and colleges tended to spend roughly three to six times as much on athletics per athlete as on academics per student, with the ratio exceeding 12 times in the Southeastern Conference" (research here (https://deltacostproject.org)).

As noted above, I love Duke sports and college sports in general, but is there any rational conclusion here other than "This is crazy"?

So, are the players not beneficiaries of the fancy locker rooms and the improved facilities?

WillJ
05-11-2018, 05:26 PM
The over-the-top locker rooms are a classic example of what happens with price controls of this sort. There were regulatory caps on bank savings rates back in the early 1970's (and other times), and banks responded with all kinds of ludicrous non-interest inducements to customers, like free toasters for new deposits. If economic actors can't compete on price, then they tend to compete more aggressively on non-price dimensions.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-11-2018, 09:20 PM
Coach K earned 9 million last year. I suspect there is a little wiggle room in the budget.

Yes, high profile coaches salaries - in FB and BB - are the fattest part of the athletic department budgets, no doubt. But not at all schools.

RPS
05-12-2018, 12:30 AM
Did you know that Gregg Popovich coached in college at Pomona-Fitzer and had a very mediocre record? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregg_Popovich#College) I mean, Pop was almost completely unable to gain any traction for that program in his 8 seasons there.I did know that he coached there. The Claremont colleges are barely an hour from me. However, it turns out that, in point of fact, he did quite a remarkable job (http://grantland.com/features/nba-gregg-popovich-san-antonio-spurs-history-coach-division-three-pomona-pitzer-college-sagehens/). The year before Pop arrived, the team had finished 2-22 and managed to lose to Caltech and erase that team's 99-game losing streak. There was no recruiting when he got there. The team was created from open tryouts. The two schools that combined to form the team had fewer students *together* than my kids' high school. The entrance requirements were similar to Duke's (or a bit higher). He instituted "recruiting" of a sort but rarely got to see a player, even on film, before he arrived on campus. Still, he was able to win the team's first conference championship ever before spending a year's sabbatical at Kansas and UNC. He went back for a year before getting hired by the Spurs as an assistant to Larry Brown (who he worked with at Kansas).


It's quite possible that Pop is a better NBA coach than Cal...Y'think?


...and Cal is a better college coach than Pop.That's far from clear, especially because Pomona-Pitzer was Pop's first head coaching job (Calipari's NBA failure came when he was a well-established coach) and because D3 there was a lot farther from big-time D1 than D1 is and was from the NBA.


So, are the players not beneficiaries of the fancy locker rooms and the improved facilities?Will answers that better than I could.


The over-the-top locker rooms are a classic example of what happens with price controls of this sort. There were regulatory caps on bank savings rates back in the early 1970's (and other times), and banks responded with all kinds of ludicrous non-interest inducements to customers, like free toasters for new deposits. If economic actors can't compete on price, then they tend to compete more aggressively on non-price dimensions.
I’ll simply note the following. If your boss said that instead of giving you a raise, he’d replace the name plate for your office with a cool television screen, you’d be the beneficiary of his largess. But I’ll bet you wouldn’t feel very good about it. You may not have even felt like it was a benefit.

All that said, here's the key point that nobody to this point has even addressed, much less justified. Division I universities and colleges spend roughly three to six times as much on athletics per athlete as on academics per student, with the ratio exceeding 12 times in the SEC. In what universe does it make sense for universities to do that? How is that remotely consistent with their purported mission?

Indoor66
05-12-2018, 07:02 AM
All that said, here's the key point that nobody to this point has even addressed, much less justified. Division I universities and colleges spend roughly three to six times as much on athletics per athlete as on academics per student, with the ratio exceeding 12 times in the SEC. In what universe does it make sense for universities to do that? How is that remotely consistent with their purported mission?

We are discussing this issue on the Duke Basketball Report Board. I could not find the Duke Philosophy Report Board or the Duke History Report Board on which I could post this. Athletics provide a service as well as entertainment. They are an outlet and a means of expression of support for the overall institution. That said, I also believe that the monster has gotten way to big and has become the tail wagging the dog.

(Sorry for going all cliche.)

Troublemaker
05-12-2018, 09:07 AM
The year before Pop arrived, the team had finished 2-22 and managed to lose to Caltech and erase that team's 99-game losing streak.

Actually, that was Popovich's first year as head coach of Pomona-Pitzer after 6 seasons as an assistant at Air Force. Now, he did a good job to never allow Pomona-Pitzer to sink to those depths again during the rest of his tenure, but overall, beyond improving on his first season, the trend line for his program wasn't good over 8 seasons.



That's far from clear, especially because Pomona-Pitzer was Pop's first head coaching job (Calipari's NBA failure came when he was a well-established coach) and because D3 there was a lot farther from big-time D1 than D1 is and was from the NBA.

How are you determining the second bolded statement? What is your objective scale of measurement? Here's the Pomona-Pitzer men's basketball website (http://www.sagehens.com/sports/mbkb/index). If you click around, you'll see that D3 basketball is still college basketball. They're not playing unorganized pickup or anything. As a D3 coach, you're still recruiting and coaching young men to try to win basketball games governed by the NCAA rulebook against young men from another school.

That said, it seems that you do implicitly agree now that these jobs we're comparing require different skillsets and are performed under different circumstances. A Hall-of-Fame NBA coach can sport a 76-129 record in D3, for example.

The biggest difference between college coaching and NBA coaching is, of course, that college coaches are their own GMs as well. That is, they are responsible for bringing in the talent that they coach, while NBA coaches can just focus on coaching the roster that they are given. Another way of putting this is perhaps that college coaches do more than NBA coaches.

lotusland
05-12-2018, 09:11 AM
We are discussing this issue on the Duke Basketball Report Board. I could not find the Duke Philosophy Report Board or the Duke History Report Board on which I could post this. Athletics provide a service as well as entertainment. They are an outlet and a means of expression of support for the overall institution. That said, I also believe that the monster has gotten way to big and has become the tail wagging the dog.

(Sorry for going all cliche.)

Except when the discussion is whether or not to ditch the amateur student athlete model (whether real or just a facade) then the purported “mission” of NCAA member institutions comes front and center doesn’t it? Even the most cynical can understand how institutions of higher learning can rationalize the grandiose expenditures made towards success on the playing fields under the current model. The assumption seems to be that removing the facade will force the NCAA to adopt a professional model but isn’t it possible that schools will be forced to acknowledge that they have no business in the sports business instead?

HereBeforeCoachK
05-12-2018, 03:46 PM
We are discussing this issue on the Duke Basketball Report Board. I could not find the Duke Philosophy Report Board or the Duke History Report Board on which I could post this. Athletics provide a service as well as entertainment. They are an outlet and a means of expression of support for the overall institution. That said, I also believe that the monster has gotten way to big and has become the tail wagging the dog.

(Sorry for going all cliche.)

Am I following RPS correctly, when he complains about how much schools spend on the athletes, while also claiming the athletes are being ripped off? How does that work exactly? I'm confused.

NSDukeFan
05-13-2018, 10:32 AM
My guess is there is a difference between spending money on and giving money to.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-13-2018, 11:09 AM
My guess is there is a difference between spending money on and giving money to.

Of course that's true, as far as it goes, but in context of his entire post, the counter intuitive irony I highlighted still applies.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-13-2018, 11:31 AM
Of course that's true, as far as it goes, but in context of his entire post, the counter intuitive irony I highlighted still applies.

And yet, surely you see the opposite irony of saying "there is simply no money to pay athletes" while having absurdly over the top facilities.

jimsumner
05-13-2018, 01:53 PM
I rather suspect none of the coaches are going to suggest a salary cutback anytime soon.

Horses, barn doors and all that.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-13-2018, 02:22 PM
I rather suspect none of the coaches are going to suggest a salary cutback anytime soon.

Horses, barn doors and all that.

I agree one hundred percent. However, it does show that there are enormous amounts of money floating around.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-13-2018, 02:24 PM
And yet, surely you see the opposite irony of saying "there is simply no money to pay athletes" while having absurdly over the top facilities.

Sorry, I disagree.....and reject your premise: Not all facilities are "over the top" and at some schools the opposite is true. The opposite was true for Duke until very recently with a lot of facilities. But again, great facilities, great training, great medical attention, great food availability....

But that's fine...if you want to play the players and take some of that money out of the facilities, at least make that case. But I think you should be careful what you ask for.

Stray Gator
05-13-2018, 03:06 PM
And yet, surely you see the opposite irony of saying "there is simply no money to pay athletes" while having absurdly over the top facilities.

The most significant difference to me is that when the money is spent on facilities, all members of the team are able to enjoy the benefits equally, which I would expect to promote a sense of unity by making each player feel that his or her contributions are valued and appreciated. If the players are compensated differentially based on their individual "fair market value," then I wonder whether even the most talented coaches would be able to foster a level of team spirit sufficient to overcome the obvious divide between the "haves" and the "have nots." It is fair to accuse me of being old-fashioned, but I simply don't see a justifiable benefit in blowing up the existing system for the sole purpose of allowing a handful of players to enjoy an immediate monetary windfall just 9 months before they would become rich anyway. In my judgment, doing away with the one-and-done rule would be a sensible change; but allowing college players to be compensated -- whether it's by the schools or entirely by the shoe and apparel companies -- is likely to alter the game in ways that most fans and participants alike will find undesirable.

jimsumner
05-13-2018, 03:18 PM
A lot of the facility upgrades have been funded by donors.

You can ask a deep-pocket donor to fund a new scoreboard or a new locker room.

Or fund a full scholarship. Lots of them are endowed at Duke.

But do we want a system where that donor can be asked to fund Vernon Carey's salary? Is there a salary cap? Does Duke get into a bidding war with Kentucky or Florida? Does the NCAA oversee this?

And I still want to see how this works within the confines of Title IX and without making club sports of wrestling, crew, field hockey, at. al.

Stray Gator
05-13-2018, 03:51 PM
. . . I still want to see how this works within the confines of Title IX and without making club sports of wrestling, crew, field hockey, at. al.

In discussing this issue with friends and fellow Duke fans, those who support an "open market" that allows the players to be compensated based on their "fair market value" acknowledge that players cannot be paid in this manner by the school or its boosters without violating NCAA "benefits" rules and federal law in the form of Title IX. Their contention, however, is that players could be compensated entirely by the shoe and apparel companies consistent with existing restrictions, except perhaps for some tweaking of NCAA rules.

Of course, we can only speculate about the consequences of such a systemic change. Some advocates maintain that it would simply be a matter of shifting the shoe company sponsorship income from coaches' salaries to player compensation, and therefore would not impact the current use of athletic department revenues from football and basketball to support non-revenue sports. But it's readily apparent that there could be a secondary shift of funds that would adversely affect non-revenue sports -- i.e., if shoe company income is no longer available to boost coaches' salaries, some (if not all) schools would simply divert a sufficient amount of athletic department revenues from the non-revenue sports budget to make up the difference, and thus assure the retention of their football and basketball coaches. In addition, there would be nothing to prevent a crooked coach from encouraging boosters with more money than scruples to collude with a shoe company in recruiting a star by agreeing to surreptitiously supplement the amount that the player will be paid by the company. In other words, I believe that once you allow player compensation money to be introduced into the system, the problems of corruption, cheating, and inequities in the college game will more likely be magnified than remedied.

lotusland
05-13-2018, 06:39 PM
In discussing this issue with friends and fellow Duke fans, those who support an "open market" that allows the players to be compensated based on their "fair market value" acknowledge that players cannot be paid in this manner by the school or its boosters without violating NCAA "benefits" rules and federal law in the form of Title IX. Their contention, however, is that players could be compensated entirely bby the shoe and apparel companies consistent with existing restrictions, except perhaps for some tweaking of NCAA rules.

Of course, we can only speculate about the consequences of such a systemic change. Some advocates maintain that it would simply be a matter of shifting the shoe company sponsorship income from coaches' salaries to player compensation, and therefore would not impact the current use of athletic department revenues from football and basketball to support non-revenue sports. But it's readily apparent that there could be a secondary shift of funds that would adversely affect non-revenue sports -- i.e., if shoe company income is no longer available to boost coaches' salaries, some (if not all) schools would simply divert a sufficient amount of athletic department revenues from the non-revenue sports budget to make up the difference, and thus assure the retention of their football and basketball coaches. In addition, there would be nothing to prevent a crooked coach from encouraging boosters with more money than scruples to collude with a shoe company in recruiting a star by agreeing to surreptitiously supplement the amount that the player will be paid by the company. In other words, I believe that once you allow player compensation money to be introduced into the system, the problems of corruption, cheating, and inequities in the college game will more likely be magnified than remedied.

If a Duke player has a 6 or 7 figure endorsement deal with Adidas, does he really play for Duke or Adidas? Who’s in charge - Coach K or Adidas? I’ve been working for awhile now and I’ve always understood that the ultimate boss signs the checks. Coach K can pound sand.

Would unlimited endorsements be allowed? Can the Rams Club offer an endorsement to players? What about some local business men who, coincidentally, happen to be members of the rams club? Would that be OK? What If the future tar heel never signs an LOI and gets a better offer from Big Blue Nation chamber of commerce just before enrollment? Maybe the NCAA shouid implement an endorsement cap per team to promote fairness? But then under performing recruits would have to be cut to free up cap space for the next big thing.

skysdad
05-13-2018, 08:53 PM
Happy Mother's Day to Wendell's mom.

porkpa
05-14-2018, 08:05 AM
Its all very simple. I do not like the OAD rule. I believe that kids should have the option of skipping college and going to the NBA.
Apart from that the kids do have options. Maybe the options do not satisfy Mrs Carter. But there are nonetheless, options available.
Your son can go to Europe or even Asia and make mucho dinero.
Your son can choose to sit out the year.
Your son can continue his education without the free advantages offered by an institution like Duke and you or he can foot the bill.
Your son can choose to do exactly what he did.
I might add that it is not entirely a race issue either. There are a few gifted white athletes who can also choose to enter the realm of "slavery".

RPS
05-14-2018, 03:48 PM
Am I following RPS correctly, when he complains about how much schools spend on the athletes, while also claiming the athletes are being ripped off? How does that work exactly? I'm confused.Because labor is essentially free, there is a lot of "extra" money around. That explains the arms races in coaches' salaries and facilities.

camion
05-14-2018, 05:29 PM
Because labor is essentially free, there is a lot of "extra" money around. That explains the arms races in coaches' salaries and facilities.

Nope. You lost me there.

I would stipulate that (generously) 5% of the athletes would be underpaid relative to their market value, but I would bet that many of the other 95% would be be hard pressed to pay the "essentially free" cost of college.

RPS
05-14-2018, 05:51 PM
I would stipulate that (generously) 5% of the athletes would be underpaid relative to their market value, but I would bet that many of the other 95% would be be hard pressed to pay the "essentially free" cost of college.You are confusing the actual cost with the sticker price.

camion
05-14-2018, 06:04 PM
You are confusing the actual cost with the sticker price.

You are greatly undervaluing the actual cost. *




*I don't like stating my opinion as fact, but what's sauce is sauce.

RPS
05-14-2018, 06:12 PM
You are greatly undervaluing the actual cost.Duke men's basketball enrolls no more than 15 scholarship players per year. What hard costs are you suggesting Duke incurs for doing so?

HereBeforeCoachK
05-14-2018, 06:23 PM
You are confusing the actual cost with the sticker price.

Which is appropriate.....sticker price is what we're talking about here....the "value" of the education, room, board, etc....

RPS
05-14-2018, 06:45 PM
Which is appropriate...sticker price is what we're talking about here...the "value" of the education, room, board, etc...Since when is sticker price and value the same thing? Besides, the issue is whether what Duke provides is "essentially free" to the university. Value is irrelevant to that.

Acymetric
05-14-2018, 08:47 PM
Since when is sticker price and value the same thing? Besides, the issue is whether what Duke provides is "essentially free" to the university. Value is irrelevant to that.

It is not essentially free (unless you are going to argue that it is essentially free for any given student, which of course isn't true or there would be 0 cost to running a University). It is more expensive to have student athletes attend because of the additional services (both academic and athletic) offered to that group of students. A small number of those partially offset that amount with the value that they individually bring, and a smaller number fully or more than fully offset that amount. Arguing that the athletes should receive compensation beyond that academic and athletic services provided now is a perfectly reasonable position for a person to have, but trying to argue that those services are "essentially free" is ridiculous. You used to make good (although a bit strong) points on this subject but your rhetoric has become more and more extreme over time and it is taking away from the points you try to make.

Newton_14
05-14-2018, 09:50 PM
It is not essentially free (unless you are going to argue that it is essentially free for any given student, which of course isn't true or there would be 0 cost to running a University). It is more expensive to have student athletes attend because of the additional services (both academic and athletic) offered to that group of students. A small number of those partially offset that amount with the value that they individually bring, and a smaller number fully or more than fully offset that amount. Arguing that the athletes should receive compensation beyond that academic and athletic services provided now is a perfectly reasonable position for a person to have, but trying to argue that those services are "essentially free" is ridiculous. You used to make good (although a bit strong) points on this subject but your rhetoric has become more and more extreme over time and it is taking away from the points you try to make.

I have no wish to enter this debate, I just wanted to share a data point since Acy brought it up. I remember reading an article several years back that during the championship year of 2010, Duke spent something like $363K per player for the entire year. Not sure if that covered the cost of academics or just athletics.

Carry on.

RPS
05-15-2018, 08:47 AM
It is not essentially free (unless you are going to argue that it is essentially free for any given student, which of course isn't true or there would be 0 cost to running a University). It is more expensive to have student athletes attend because of the additional services (both academic and athletic) offered to that group of students. A small number of those partially offset that amount with the value that they individually bring, and a smaller number fully or more than fully offset that amount. Arguing that the athletes should receive compensation beyond that academic and athletic services provided now is a perfectly reasonable position for a person to have, but trying to argue that those services are "essentially free" is ridiculous. You used to make good (although a bit strong) points on this subject but your rhetoric has become more and more extreme over time and it is taking away from the points you try to make.You are missing the point, so I must not be clear.

As I noted above, D1 schools spend 3-12 times more per student on athletes than they do on "regular" students: facilities, travel, training table, coaches, etc. And certainly that is one way to look at what players get in exchange for their labor at Duke (and elsewhere). My basketball player friends from the old days see what they got as invaluable. No argument.

But for the OAD player who doesn't want to be there -- who is simply putting in the time to be eligible for the NBA -- the hard coasts are negligible. It costs Duke next to nothing to put players in classes and into empty living space. Food is a hard cost. So are books and the stipend athletes now receive. And that's about it. My point is simply that the idea that players are being "paid" the sticker price cost of a Duke education is silly.

thedukelamere
05-15-2018, 09:04 AM
I have no wish to enter this debate, I just wanted to share a data point since Acy brought it up. I remember reading an article several years back that during the championship year of 2010, Duke spent something like $363K per player for the entire year. Not sure if that covered the cost of academics or just athletics.

Carry on.

https://www.cnbc.com/id/35861926

This article mentions the 2008-2009 season - $394,068 per player. Although without shining a light on what those expenses entailed, it's tough to see where that money went... Glancing at the schedule we didn't do a ton of traveling that year; No Maui, just MSG. I'd assume some accounting gymnastics took place and some of the facility/equipment upgrades were looped into that figure, otherwise they broke it down and decided that's what a full season of private coaching sessions with the GOAT is worth. I mean, K Academy costs $10k for the week... Seems the players are getting a bargain for year-round coaching for under $400k.

Jeffrey
05-15-2018, 10:51 AM
But for the OAD player who doesn't want to be there -- who is simply putting in the time to be eligible for the NBA -- the hard coasts are negligible. It costs Duke next to nothing to put players in classes and into empty living space. Food is a hard cost. So are books and the stipend athletes now receive. And that's about it. My point is simply that the idea that players are being "paid" the sticker price cost of a Duke education is silly.

How much did Kyrie's medical care cost Duke? How many games did he play for Duke?

RPS
05-15-2018, 11:16 AM
How much did Kyrie's medical care cost Duke? How many games did he play for Duke?I'm pleased that Duke did that because, as I understand it, NCAA rules do not require it (https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/05/i-trusted-em-when-ncaa-schools-abandon-their-injured-athletes/275407/). Moreover, players aren't entitled (http://collegead.com/should-the-ncaa-compensate-athletes-for-career-ending-injuries-fournette-chubb-prothro-lattimore-doughty/) to anything even when they suffer career-ending or life-threatening injuries. Indeed, the sad case of Ray Dennison (https://deadspin.com/how-the-myth-of-the-ncaa-student-athlete-was-born-1524282374) led to the myth of the "student-athlete."

ncexnyc
05-15-2018, 11:21 AM
Maybe we should change the name of this thread. I haven't heard anything from Wendell's mom lately, so it appears she's cooled off.

Can't say that for some of the forum members.

Acymetric
05-15-2018, 11:21 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/id/35861926

This article mentions the 2008-2009 season - $394,068 per player. Although without shining a light on what those expenses entailed, it's tough to see where that money went... Glancing at the schedule we didn't do a ton of traveling that year; No Maui, just MSG. I'd assume some accounting gymnastics took place and some of the facility/equipment upgrades were looped into that figure, otherwise they broke it down and decided that's what a full season of private coaching sessions with the GOAT is worth. I mean, K Academy costs $10k for the week... Seems the players are getting a bargain for year-round coaching for under $400k.

That very well may be true, I would guess that includes some "per player" assignment of staff costs. But just because we did not go to Maui or MSG does not mean we did not have to cover hotel, bus, and flight costs for travel to less high-profile locations. And I kind of doubt our guys are flying economy...some of them probably wouldn't fit in economy if they wanted to.

Stray Gator
05-15-2018, 11:53 AM
. . . But for the OAD player who doesn't want to be there -- who is simply putting in the time to be eligible for the NBA -- the hard coasts are negligible. It costs Duke next to nothing to put players in classes and into empty living space. Food is a hard cost. So are books and the stipend athletes now receive. And that's about it. My point is simply that the idea that players are being "paid" the sticker price cost of a Duke education is silly.

If the proposal is that players should be compensated based on their fair market value, then the corresponding benefits provided to scholarship athletes should likewise be measured based on fair market value, which is the lost opportunity to generate income from other sources by offering those benefits to a willing buyer on the open market. Applying that standard, the costs to Duke of providing full academic benefits to any athlete -- whether a star one-and-done player who is destined to earn millions in the NBA or a career backup -- equals the total cost of tuition, room, board, and fees for an ordinary Duke undergraduate student. (After all, Duke wouldn't likely want to leave classroom seats and dorm rooms empty when thousands of qualified applicants are clamoring for the opportunity to occupy them.) Of course, scholarship athletes receive substantial additional benefits, including private tutoring, personal training/medical services, travel expenses, apparel, insurance, etc. We can only speculate about the total amount of revenue that Duke could realize if it offered those benefits for sale on the open market -- I can easily imagine some wealthy alumni who would pay a tidy sum just for the privilege of traveling with the team and sitting on the bench, or providing that dream opportunity for their child -- but I'm guessing that if the compensated players were required to pay all of their own expenses based on the fair market value of those benefits, any who make less than $250,000 might find it difficult to make ends meet.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-15-2018, 01:19 PM
I have no wish to enter this debate, I just wanted to share a data point since Acy brought it up. I remember reading an article several years back that during the championship year of 2010, Duke spent something like $363K per player for the entire year. Not sure if that covered the cost of academics or just athletics.

Carry on.

Per player spending is a strange thing anyway. I mean, would you take a job for minimum wage if they built a multi-million dollar showering facility for you and your coworkers? Or flew you on a Lear jet to and from work?

But... We spent 10 million dollars on you! That's great, but I got a paycheck for $300...

Obviously ridiculous examples, but "per player spending" can be, say ten pairs of Nike for forty basketball games - there's about $2k... But you can't eat it or spend it

camion
05-15-2018, 01:49 PM
Per player spending is a strange thing anyway. I mean, would you take a job for minimum wage if they built a multi-million dollar showering facility for you and your coworkers? Or flew you on a Lear jet to and from work?

But... We spent 10 million dollars on you! That's great, but I got a paycheck for $300...

Obviously ridiculous examples, but "per player spending" can be, say ten pairs of Nike for forty basketball games - there's about $2k... But you can't eat it or spend it

Of course it works the other way too. Would you take the deal if they paid you $50,000 per year, but you had to pay for your food, housing, clothing, transportation including away games, training (at Golds Gym perhaps), tutoring, insurance and tuition?

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-15-2018, 02:31 PM
Of course it works the other way too. Would you take the deal if they paid you $50,000 per year, but you had to pay for your food, housing, clothing, transportation including away games, training (at Golds Gym perhaps), tutoring, insurance and tuition?

Understood. I was just pointing out that it is an odd metric.

HereBeforeCoachK
05-15-2018, 02:54 PM
Per player spending is a strange thing anyway. I mean, would you take a job for minimum wage if they built a multi-million dollar showering facility for you and your coworkers? Or flew you on a Lear jet to and from work?

But... We spent 10 million dollars on you! That's great, but I got a paycheck for $300...

Obviously ridiculous examples, but "per player spending" can be, say ten pairs of Nike for forty basketball games - there's about $2k... But you can't eat it or spend it

But we know what the non ridiculous answers are......room, board, uniforms, travel (nice travel) medical care as much as needed, tuition, and so on.

Acymetric
05-15-2018, 03:15 PM
Per player spending is a strange thing anyway. I mean, would you take a job for minimum wage if they built a multi-million dollar showering facility for you and your coworkers? Or flew you on a Lear jet to and from work?

But... We spent 10 million dollars on you! That's great, but I got a paycheck for $300...

Obviously ridiculous examples, but "per player spending" can be, say ten pairs of Nike for forty basketball games - there's about $2k... But you can't eat it or spend it

Good point, but does it change the calculus at all if you are just entering the job market for the first time, and instead of a multi-million dollar shower facility it was a multi-million dollar facility with some of the best equipment and resources available for training in your given field (with excellent connections for elite job placement 1-5 years down the line) in addition to some high-end leisure amenities (I would like to fly around in a lear jet...)? I've been in my current field for about two years and I would probably still take that deal right now if offered.

The main argument for why that isn't sufficient is that the players don't have other good options available, but I remain unconvinced that should be the NCAA's problem to solve, and it actually seems to bolster the NCAA's position because in theory if there was viable, competitive business model where the same players got paid one would expect in a capitalistic society that someone would have pursued it by now.

uh_no
05-15-2018, 05:45 PM
The main argument for why that isn't sufficient is that the players don't have other good options available, but I remain unconvinced that should be the NCAA's problem to solve, and it actually seems to bolster the NCAA's position because in theory if there was viable, competitive business model where the same players got paid one would expect in a capitalistic society that someone would have pursued it by now.

I'm selling naked calls to any takers on the big baller league!

RPS
05-15-2018, 05:48 PM
I'm selling naked calls to any takers on the big baller league!Probably a safe bet, but still picking up nickels in front of a steamroller.

uh_no
05-15-2018, 07:10 PM
Probably a safe bet, but still picking up nickels in front of a steamroller.

weeelllp, fortunately gambling is legal now 😂

Jeffrey
05-16-2018, 09:50 AM
Probably a safe bet, but still picking up nickels in front of a steamroller.

One man gathers what another man spills.

devildeac
05-16-2018, 10:07 AM
One man gathers what another man spills.

My ceiling is not my roof. :rolleyes:

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-16-2018, 11:01 AM
My ceiling is not my roof. :rolleyes:

With all the rain we are getting this week, I am hoping my roof doesn't become my floor

uh_no
05-16-2018, 11:41 AM
My ceiling is not my roof. :rolleyes:

My ceiling is the premium less taxes.

Saratoga2
05-16-2018, 12:49 PM
With all the rain we are getting this week, I am hoping my roof doesn't become my floor

Don't know where you live, but we are in the NC mountain area. We dumped out 1 3/4 inches from our 5 inch rain gage yesterday and put it back. Today it was filled to overflowing and it is still raining. We heard 5.65 inches and still coming. Our softball is cancelled until further notice since we will need a boat to get on the fields. Biblical in nature.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
05-16-2018, 02:15 PM
Don't know where you live, but we are in the NC mountain area. We dumped out 1 3/4 inches from our 5 inch rain gage yesterday and put it back. Today it was filled to overflowing and it is still raining. We heard 5.65 inches and still coming. Our softball is cancelled until further notice since we will need a boat to get on the fields. Biblical in nature.

Asheville here. Hey, neighbor!

Furniture
06-25-2018, 09:18 PM
Maybe we should change the name of this thread. I haven't heard anything from Wendell's mom lately, so it appears she's cooled off.

Can't say that for some of the forum members.

Maybe she hasn’t.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html

“They treat you like a piece of property. Period. Point blank. They take things away from you, they talk bad to you, they’re disrespectful to you,” Kylia Carter is quoted as saying during her son's pre-draft party last week. “The act of getting paid is not what makes a difference, the difference is that in the NBA [players] are respected in the role that they’re in. Whatever it is they’re doing, they have a voice and they’re respected. In college, you have no voice. It’s a system set up that they drop you in and tell you what to do — you be a rebounder, shot-blocker, you take all the shots, nobody else can shoot. My child never got to show his full set of skills. He never got to do that.”
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html#storylink=cpy

arnie
06-25-2018, 09:31 PM
Maybe she hasn’t.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html

“They treat you like a piece of property. Period. Point blank. They take things away from you, they talk bad to you, they’re disrespectful to you,” Kylia Carter is quoted as saying during her son's pre-draft party last week. “The act of getting paid is not what makes a difference, the difference is that in the NBA [players] are respected in the role that they’re in. Whatever it is they’re doing, they have a voice and they’re respected. In college, you have no voice. It’s a system set up that they drop you in and tell you what to do — you be a rebounder, shot-blocker, you take all the shots, nobody else can shoot. My child never got to show his full set of skills. He never got to do that.”
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html#storylink=cpy

And further into the article, Wendell agrees with his mom. This is a direct hit against K.

weezie
06-25-2018, 09:42 PM
Well, that is a shame. I'm not quite sure how much more playing time Wendell could have amassed as he played in every game but I'm dismayed to think he was miserable the whole time.

Gosh, what torture he must have endured.

DangerDevil
06-25-2018, 09:47 PM
I found the SI article interesting but also found some of the sentiments to be confusing.

On the one hand I get the Carters’ frustrations with the NCAA. On the other hand the article talks about the Carters reluctance to declare for the NBA after one year of college citing his stellar academic history, the fact that he was accepted to Harvard, and his interests outside of basketball.

Isn’t part of being a team figuring out how to maximize the collective talents of the whole?

Isn’t the fact that a player can chose where they wish to attend a pretty big voice as opposed to throwing your name in a draft and being told who now owns your “rights”?

???

Furniture
06-25-2018, 10:07 PM
And further into the article, Wendell agrees with his mom. This is a direct hit against K.

She could also be hinting about other players too like Gary and Duval.
Anyway I agree it does seem to be directed against K but under the guise of the NCAA.

I wonder what she will say if Wendell becomes a role player in the NBA? I don’t think he will but from my uneducated view of both the NBA and college (or at least Duke) it’s team first.

sagegrouse
06-25-2018, 10:56 PM
She could also be hinting about other players too like Gary and Duval.
Anyway I agree it does seem to be directed against K but under the guise of the NCAA.

I wonder what she will say if Wendell becomes a role player in the NBA? I don’t think he will but from my uneducated view of both the NBA and college (or at least Duke) it’s team first.

Anyway, I have a prediction. Mom and Dad are moving to Chicago to be with Wendell Jr. and "help out." Mom even said she might move in with him -- "no, I'm living by myself," said the son. But still, the idea is there.... After six months, Wendell Jr. will start asking about a trade.

duke4ever19
06-25-2018, 11:13 PM
Maybe she hasn’t.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html

“They treat you like a piece of property. Period. Point blank. They take things away from you, they talk bad to you, they’re disrespectful to you,” Kylia Carter is quoted as saying during her son's pre-draft party last week. “The act of getting paid is not what makes a difference, the difference is that in the NBA [players] are respected in the role that they’re in. Whatever it is they’re doing, they have a voice and they’re respected. In college, you have no voice. It’s a system set up that they drop you in and tell you what to do — you be a rebounder, shot-blocker, you take all the shots, nobody else can shoot. My child never got to show his full set of skills. He never got to do that.”
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html#storylink=cpy

We've surely got trouble!
Right here in River City!
Remember the Maine, Plymouth Rock and the Golden Rule!
Oh, we've got trouble.
We're in terrible, terrible trouble.
That game with the fifteen numbered balls is a devil's tool!
Oh yes we got trouble, trouble, trouble!
With a "T"! Gotta rhyme it with "P"!
And that stands for Pool!

Mrs. Carter is a binary, apocalyptic thinker if there ever was one. Her speech is saturated in that lingo. It's high on drama and low on subtlety.

gep
06-25-2018, 11:43 PM
Maybe she hasn’t.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html

“They treat you like a piece of property. Period. Point blank. They take things away from you, they talk bad to you, they’re disrespectful to you,” Kylia Carter is quoted as saying during her son's pre-draft party last week. “The act of getting paid is not what makes a difference, the difference is that in the NBA [players] are respected in the role that they’re in. Whatever it is they’re doing, they have a voice and they’re respected. In college, you have no voice. It’s a system set up that they drop you in and tell you what to do — you be a rebounder, shot-blocker, you take all the shots, nobody else can shoot. My child never got to show his full set of skills. He never got to do that.”
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html#storylink=cpy


And further into the article, Wendell agrees with his mom. This is a direct hit against K.

I watched the video... I don't know when the video was shot, but Mrs. Carter, to me, is definitely directing her anger at the NCAA and its system... not Duke. And Wendell may be agreeing to his mom's anger at the NCAA. I'm not sure I get that either was angry at Duke. Maybe I missed the whole point...

Steven43
06-26-2018, 12:37 AM
And further into the article, Wendell agrees with his mom. This is a direct hit against K.
If this kid and his mom are talking poorly about Coach K they will have crossed a line in the sand from which there is perhaps no coming back. Coach K’s main purpose at Duke University is to help guide the young men under his tutelage into becoming the best they can be as a basketball player, as a student, and most importantly, as a person. Rather than cast aspersions on Coach K, Mrs, Carter should instead be thankful that her son got the opportunity to be a pupil of one of the great teachers and leaders in the history of college athletics.

HereBeforeCoachK
06-26-2018, 03:49 AM
If this kid and his mom are talking poorly about Coach K they will have crossed a line in the sand from which there is perhaps no coming back. Coach K’s main purpose at Duke University is to help guide the young men under his tutelage into becoming the best they can be as a basketball player, as a student, and most importantly, as a person. Rather than cast aspersions on Coach K, Mrs, Carter should instead be thankful that her son got the opportunity to be a pupil of one of the great teachers and leaders in the history of college athletics.

You know, I was very uncomfortable with all the sugar coating and deference shown to Mama Carter - on this forum - when she came out with her first absurd tirade. I was angry then, and a little uncomfortable stating so.

Well now she's doubled down...and now Wendell has joined the battle apparently. I've got news for you mama, we didn't use and abuse Wendell. He didn't create anything new for Duke that hasn't been going on for 35 years. He stepped into a spotlight and in front of a fan base that's been built by names like Banks and Gminski and Ferry and Laettner and Hill and Hurley...and on and on for years. Wendell didn't create that. He simply climbed aboard. We were Duke fans before Wendell, and will be after.

HE's now a multi-millionaire, honing his skills for less than a year at Duke under K. If you think that's exploitation, or slavery, then sorry - you're not thinking.

devilnfla
06-26-2018, 06:17 AM
The only thing that held Carter back, or limited his ability to showcase his entire game, was his inability to play defense without fouling. He logged a lot of minutes riding the pine because of silly fouls.

dukelifer
06-26-2018, 06:43 AM
Maybe she hasn’t.

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html

“They treat you like a piece of property. Period. Point blank. They take things away from you, they talk bad to you, they’re disrespectful to you,” Kylia Carter is quoted as saying during her son's pre-draft party last week. “The act of getting paid is not what makes a difference, the difference is that in the NBA [players] are respected in the role that they’re in. Whatever it is they’re doing, they have a voice and they’re respected. In college, you have no voice. It’s a system set up that they drop you in and tell you what to do — you be a rebounder, shot-blocker, you take all the shots, nobody else can shoot. My child never got to show his full set of skills. He never got to do that.”
Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/article213802009.html#storylink=cpy

I am not sure how much pros are respected. If you perform well- you are lauded but if you fail to deliver the criticism is intense. If Wendell is not the answer in Chicago he will hear it. I wish Wendell all the best. It is unfortunate that he had a bad experience at Duke but college ball is not for everyone. In retrospect they probably should have stayed out a year or gone to smaller place where Wendell was the man. What they don’t seem to understand is that when you play on a team of many excellent players it is up to you to stand out. Duke prepares kids to be in a pro environment. We will see if Wendell will stand out at the next level.

Channing
06-26-2018, 06:48 AM
Ms. Carter is the personification of complaints against millennials. If her son wasn't the best it was someone else's fault. If WC had to interview for jobs outside of the NBA I assume that Ms. Carter would accompany her son on interviews and call the company afterwards.

Troublemaker
06-26-2018, 07:03 AM
Well, that is a shame. I'm not quite sure how much more playing time Wendell could have amassed as he played in every game but I'm dismayed to think he was miserable the whole time.

Gosh, what torture he must have endured.


The only thing that held Carter back, or limited his ability to showcase his entire game, was his inability to play defense without fouling. He logged a lot of minutes riding the pine because of silly fouls.

I don't think Kylia and Wendell are referring to playing time here. By referencing his "full set of skills," they are imo probably talking about his role (Marvin was option #1) and Duke's surprisingly narrow offense last season. The NBA is a pick-n-roll (PNR) league, and I'm sure NBA teams in the lead-up to the draft were pestering Marvin and Wendell and also Duke's staff about why Duke didn't run more pick-n-roll last season. I think that's where these frustrations stem from. Duke often ran a prehistoric offense by modern NBA standards by focusing so much on postups instead of spreading the court for PNR. Wendell had to assure these NBA teams that were planning to invest a high draft pick in him that he could be a good PNR roll man who has the IQ to not just finish inside but make the correct pass on the short roll. Standard NBA offense that didn't get displayed at Duke.

FYI, if you want Wendell and Marvin's PNR data and how limited a sample they were, you can listen to the Dunc'd On NBA podcasts where the hosts of that show break down Marvin and Wendell for their draft analysis. Each Duke big man was tackled on a separate podcast with lots of Synergy data involved in the analysis. Alternatively, if you actually have a Synergy account, you can just see the data directly and give me your password :-)

Note to the DBR site owners (maybe -jk can pass this along). If you guys want to invest in a Synergy account (so DBR can beef up its analytics) but don't feel like you have time to produce content off of Synergy, I am willing to do that for free. And there are half-a-dozen (at least) posters on here that I can think of off the top of my head that could produce excellent content using Synergy as well.


She could also be hinting about other players too like Gary and Duval.
Anyway I agree it does seem to be directed against K but under the guise of the NCAA.

I wonder what she will say if Wendell becomes a role player in the NBA? I don’t think he will but from my uneducated view of both the NBA and college (or at least Duke) it’s team first.

For a center like Wendell that doesn't have #1 overall talent (e.g. Towns, Embiid) or rare physical dimensions (e.g. Gobert), I think solid starter is roughly his ceiling in the modern NBA. And therefore, yes, he'll be a role player. Hopefully a valued one that contenders want on their team.

dudog84
06-26-2018, 07:10 AM
And here I thought LaVar Ball was a pain.

elvis14
06-26-2018, 08:05 AM
You know, I was very uncomfortable with all the sugar coating and deference shown to Mama Carter - on this forum - when she came out with her first absurd tirade. I was angry then, and a little uncomfortable stating so.

Well now she's doubled down...and now Wendell has joined the battle apparently. I've got news for you mama, we didn't use and abuse Wendell. He didn't create anything new for Duke that hasn't been going on for 35 years. He stepped into a spotlight and in front of a fan base that's been built by names like Banks and Gminski and Ferry and Laettner and Hill and Hurley...and on and on for years. Wendell didn't create that. He simply climbed aboard. We were Duke fans before Wendell, and will be after.

HE's now a multi-millionaire, honing his skills for less than a year at Duke under K. If you think that's exploitation, or slavery, then sorry - you're not thinking.

I'm with HereBeforeCoachK. I know some of you are saying that the comments are directed at the NCAA and 'the system' and not Duke but I can tell you that only Duke fans will see it that way and this will be used against us in recruiting. Duke provided the best stepping stone in the nation for her son to move from AAU ball to the NBA after only 1 year. Duke provided outstanding coaching, teammates, playing environment and gave Wendell the opportunity to start an education (one that most of us can't afford). So basically, I've had about enough of her ridiculous rhetoric. I'm all for people speaking up when there's a real issue (#resist) but this is just crap.

Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15
06-26-2018, 08:10 AM
And here I thought LaVar Ball was a pain.

Come on now...

ChillinDuke
06-26-2018, 08:11 AM
...

Note to the DBR site owners (maybe -jk can pass this along). If you guys want to invest in a Synergy account (so DBR can beef up its analytics) but don't feel like you have time to produce content off of Synergy, I am willing to do that for free. And there are half-a-dozen (at least) posters on here that I can think of off the top of my head that could produce excellent content using Synergy as well.

...

Is it $20 per month? If so, and the site owners decline your offer but are generally supportive, I'd be willing to take part in a syndicate that pays for the service so that others on DBR (much more statistically savvy) can produce content.

That is next-level DBR content right there. And I'm all for it.

- Chillin

jv001
06-26-2018, 08:12 AM
On one hand, we have MBIII thanking his Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ for his blessings and on the other, we have Ms. Carter and Wendell whining and complaining about him being coached by the GOAT. They should be thankful that Wendell was able to play for a coach like K. Wendell was showcased on TV for the entire season.
It seems Mom and son are upset that every play for the entire season was not run through him. Looks like Mom Carter has some LaVar Ball in her. GoDuke!

weezie
06-26-2018, 08:24 AM
Come on now...

I'm with dudog here. Part of the DBR fan code is that we have to watch our tones and "act" reasonably polite.

But every camel has that straw. See ya Mrs. Carter. Have fun on the Miracle Mile.

UrinalCake
06-26-2018, 08:43 AM
I listened to a ton of pre-draft player analysis, and it was pretty common for players to be described as not having shown their full potential in college. It’s not specific to Duke. Ayton was played at the 4 next to an immobile center. Jaren Jackson was also played at the 4 while Miles Bridges played the 3. Kevin Knox was a 3 and sometimes a 2. All of those guys played out of position because it was what worked best for the team. The goal of a college coach is to win games, not to individually develop players in the way that they (or their mothers) think is best.

As for Carter, the biggest knock on him was lateral quickness and his ability to defend on the perimeter off of switches. He likely feels that if we had played man defense then he could have demonstrated that ability. But it’s also possible (and honestly likely) that his flaws would have been further exposed by him being constantly beaten off the dribble and his draft stock would have actually fallen.

Carter’s mom seems like a real helicopter parent. I don’t blame her for wanting the best for her son, but her constant rants about the system treating her son unfairly are getting old. Duke’s program have him every conceivable opportunity to succeed.

CameronBornAndBred
06-26-2018, 08:45 AM
He got drafted 7th in the NBA. He didn't get drafted higher because of what he didn't show in college, and for the same reason he didn't get drafted lower. What he didn't show in college had no impact. I don't get what she's whining about. Her son is living a dream that only a handful of kids ever get to.