Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 320
  1. #261
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mechanicsburg, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    I think that would solve the problem long term...because I believe the interest in such a system would dry up, and the money would stop, and then people could stop worrying about it. Now am I convinced the interest would dry up? No, but I think it likely...of course, that could just be that my interest would vaporize instantly and I am projecting to other fans.
    I’m in the same boat as you but unfortunately I’m not sure fans across the country would agree. There are many areas where college sports is the only real local team or that team is consistently better. Alabama, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Clemson and Oklahoma fans are often bigger fans of college than pros. Those fans will just care about cheering for winners and not the amateurism aspect.

  2. #262
    Quote Originally Posted by AGDukesky View Post
    I’m in the same boat as you but unfortunately I’m not sure fans across the country would agree. There are many areas where college sports is the only real local team or that team is consistently better. Alabama, Ohio State, Notre Dame, Clemson and Oklahoma fans are often bigger fans of college than pros. Those fans will just care about cheering for winners and not the amateurism aspect.
    You may be right, which is why I was circumspect in my prediction. If it comes to that, the big football schools will likely have the budgets to overwhelm everybody else (including Duke and most of the ACC) in every sport. It's already that way with coaches. Alabama football has all these paid "consultants" that are in effect more assistant coaches - Duke will not have that.

    Therefore, I think eventually, if not sooner, my prediction will pan out...with maybe 20-30 some schools above the rest operating like a 30 team pro league...

  3. #263
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    greater New Orleans area
    Quote Originally Posted by 75Crazie View Post
    As absurd as this sounds … I'm to this point as well. Remove the academic criteria and the need to attend classes and run the programs as an isolated adjunct to the university. Or, if you prefer, institute a very soft set of sports-related courses that are mandated for progression through the program. Given the "students" being brought into major football/basketball programs these days, the current academic criteria is little more than a very big, ugly joke.
    The problem is that the vast, vast majority of college athletes will NOT become professionals in their sport. Giving them some pittance and no education while they are in school would be a giant step backward IMHO. We should not be making decisions on these issues based principally on how they affect the stars of the game.

  4. #264
    Quote Originally Posted by 75Crazie View Post
    As absurd as this sounds … I'm to this point as well. Remove the academic criteria and the need to attend classes and run the programs as an isolated adjunct to the university. Or, if you prefer, institute a very soft set of sports-related courses that are mandated for progression through the program. Given the "students" being brought into major football/basketball programs these days, the current academic criteria is little more than a very big, ugly joke.
    Quote Originally Posted by SoCalDukeFan View Post
    There are college athletes who are excellent students. I fully understand that many are not and that many are only there for their sport, have no interest in school, and pretty much take joke classes now. But if you say that athletes are in some kind of adjunct role isolated to the university are you denying the legitimate student/athletes a chance for a real college education.

    Let players go pro whenever they want. Have real minor leagues in the team sports.

    I would guess that golf and tennis are kind of like this now. Plenty of opportunities for 18 year olds to play pro at lower levels without having to go to class.

    SoCal
    Quote Originally Posted by Kfanarmy View Post
    The problem is that the vast, vast majority of college athletes will NOT become professionals in their sport. Giving them some pittance and no education while they are in school would be a giant step backward IMHO. We should not be making decisions on these issues based principally on how they affect the stars of the game.
    I think all of you are, at least, partly right here. There is no doubt in my mind that the vast majority of kids playing varsity sports at Div. 1 (and Div. 2 and 3) schools are taking, more or less, "real" academic courses and probably can be described as "student-athletes" and are getting something more out of college than just playing sports. But there is also no doubt that at quite a few Div. 1 schools, there are athletes playing certain sports (football, basketball, etc) who are not taking real courses (see UNC scandal) and not really getting much out of college besides playing their sport. This is the dilemma for the pro sports teams and the NCAA. How to create a system for those kids who have little to no academic interests but need to develop their athletic skills for a possible professional career. It seems to me that maybe pro baseball has the best system with a minor league training ground for those kids who do not go to college. But I'm a cynic and believe that the NCAA and the biggest athletic schools will never give up the revenues from football and basketball (do you think Duke wants all the OAD's to go straight to the NBA?? Hell NO) or that Alabama wants all those HS superstar football players to play instead for a minor football team? Those schools will never voluntarily accede to that system.

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by duke79 View Post
    This is the dilemma for the pro sports teams and the NCAA. How to create a system for those kids who have little to no academic interests but need to develop their athletic skills for a possible professional career. It seems to me that maybe pro baseball has the best system with a minor league training ground for those kids who do not go to college. But I'm a cynic and believe that the NCAA and the biggest athletic schools will never give up the revenues from football and basketball (do you think Duke wants all the OAD's to go straight to the NBA?? Hell NO) or that Alabama wants all those HS superstar football players to play instead for a minor football team? Those schools will never voluntarily accede to that system.
    First, I don't think it's necessarily true that having the 1-2% of stars who will go pro taken out of the college game will hurt college revenues. As long as there are still really good players - and there will be even after the NBA takes their handful a year - and as long as colleges wear the name of the school on the unis - and they will - the revenues will be there. Rare rare rare is the player like Zion, who makes all of college hoops more watchable.

    So this brings us to the baseball system, which is an interesting model. I don't see it working for FB at all, and not so great for BB. There is no reason to think that there will be big fan interest in this - as baseball's fan interest in minor league play has more to do with many years of tradition along with all kinds of gimmicky promotions, super cheap tickets, and a lot of stuff going on to entertain the non baseball fans so the whole family can go together. And these players are not paid much at all - certainly not enough to replace the value of playing a year or two in college, when all is tabulated.

    Something has got to give - which seems to be ignored by the PTP advocates. Most (Bilas, I'm speaking to you) argue this as if every school has so much money that paying the players can be done without pain, or perhaps only pain to the fat salaries of the coaches and athletic directors. This is not the case at most of the P5 schools, let alone the smaller conference schools. PTP's any meaningful amount will mean severe pain to non revenue sports. It will mean less in the way of stadium enhancements, uniforms, travel, etc. It will also mean an elite group of super teams - big schools with big football revenues - maybe 2-3 dozen - and then everyone else (Duke, most of the ACC) in a lower tier. The money will guarantee this. It already does in FB, but this will only magnify it and the FB schools will take everything over.

    Some may say all that is worth it to pay the players, and while I don' agree, I can respect that opinion. So let's make all these consequences a part of the PTP debate instead of the shallow "poor players versus fatcat athletic departments" class warfare single dimension nonsense. And I would say be careful what you wish for. Worrying about who gets today's money might lead to a system that over time doesn't have this kind of money tomorrow. Then problem solved...and now there's a new problem that may be worse.

    There are no simple answers here, none without unintended and un-forseen consequences - I just wish the debate nationally were more honest to all of these factors. Currently, it's not. When Boeheim tried to inject some of this reality into the debate last season, he was publicly slapped down. But everything he said was 100% correct.
    Last edited by HereBeforeCoachK; 08-20-2019 at 07:09 AM.

  6. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    First, I don't think it's necessarily true that having the 1-2% of stars who will go pro taken out of the college game will hurt college revenues. As long as there are still really good players - and there will be even after the NBA takes their handful a year - and as long as colleges wear the name of the school on the unis - and they will - the revenues will be there. Rare rare rare is the player like Zion, who makes all of college hoops more watchable.

    So this brings us to the baseball system, which is an interesting model. I don't see it working for FB at all, and not so great for BB. There is no reason to think that there will be big fan interest in this - as baseball's fan interest in minor league play has more to do with many years of tradition along with all kinds of gimmicky promotions, super cheap tickets, and a lot of stuff going on to entertain the non baseball fans so the whole family can go together. And these players are not paid much at all - certainly not enough to replace the value of playing a year or two in college, when all is tabulated.

    Something has got to give - which seems to be ignored by the PTP advocates. Most (Bilas, I'm speaking to you) argue this as if every school has so much money that paying the players can be done without pain, or perhaps only pain to the fat salaries of the coaches and athletic directors. This is not the case at most of the P5 schools, let alone the smaller conference schools. PTP's any meaningful amount will mean severe pain to non revenue sports. It will mean less in the way of stadium enhancements, uniforms, travel, etc. It will also mean an elite group of super teams - big schools with big football revenues - maybe 2-3 dozen - and then everyone else (Duke, most of the ACC) in a lower tier. The money will guarantee this. It already does in FB, but this will only magnify it and the FB schools will take everything over.

    Some may say all that is worth it to pay the players, and while I don' agree, I can respect that opinion. So let's make all these consequences a part of the PTP debate instead of the shallow "poor players versus fatcat athletic departments" class warfare single dimension nonsense. And I would say be careful what you wish for. Worrying about who gets today's money might lead to a system that over time doesn't have this kind of money tomorrow. Then problem solved...and now there's a new problem that may be worse.

    There are no simple answers here, none without unintended and un-forseen consequences - I just wish the debate nationally were more honest to all of these factors. Currently, it's not. When Boeheim tried to inject some of this reality into the debate last season, he was publicly slapped down. But everything he said was 100% correct.
    Damn, there you go injecting some reality into a virtue signaling meme.

  7. #267
    Duke says it can find no evidence to substantiate allegations.
    The interesting thing is that Duke wants it known that the university, not the athletic department, did the investigation.

  8. #268
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is online now Moderator, Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Storrs, CT
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.

  9. #269
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    Well, Scott, if Duke and/or Zion did something improper — and I absolutely do not believe they did — we’ll just have to deal with it. Nothing you or I can do about it anyway.

  10. #270
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    I suspect the internal investigation was focused mostly on Duke and culpability rather than the existence of payments from Nike to Zion. This would account for a universe in which Duke feels confident in any eligibility issues, and where the slimball can be confident that Zion was paid.

    Splitting hairs? Absolutely.

  11. #271
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I suspect the internal investigation was focused mostly on Duke and culpability rather than the existence of payments from Nike to Zion. This would account for a universe in which Duke feels confident in any eligibility issues, and where the slimball can be confident that Zion was paid.

    Splitting hairs? Absolutely.
    I assume that the guy can say anything he wants because he has nothing to lose in a slander suit.
    "Blood from a turnip" idea.

  12. #272
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    Avenatti is accused of much more than being a slime ball. He is accused of things that raise serious doubts about his credibility:

    In a sweeping expansion of the criminal charges against Michael Avenatti, a federal grand jury has indicted the Los Angeles lawyer on 36 counts of fraud, perjury, failure to pay taxes, embezzlement and other financial crimes.

    Avenatti stole millions of dollars from five clients and used a tangled web of shell companies and bank accounts to cover up the theft, the Santa Ana grand jury alleged in an indictment that prosecutors made public Thursday.
    From the LA Times:
    https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-avenatti-indicted-fraud-theft-charges-20190411-story.html

  13. #273
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    As best I can tell, Avenatti already produced his best evidence in this matter --- the text messages from Nike execs discussing a plan to pay Zion. Well, okay, my guess is that there are conversations being had among folks seeking to profit off these kids all the freaking time. So what? That doesn't mean that Sharonda Williams received payment from Nike for "consulting services", which is what was originally alleged. The University conducted its initial compliance review and now this investigation and have found nothing. Sooooo...unless something concrete surfaces, there's nothing to be concerned about.

    The contract negation dispute with the marketing firm Zion signed with during the school year strikes me as more weird and troubling giving it's timing...and really, really poor decision-making by the family.

  14. #274
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    As best I can tell, Avenatti already produced his best evidence in this matter --- the text messages from Nike execs discussing a plan to pay Zion. Well, okay, my guess is that there are conversations being had among folks seeking to profit off these kids all the freaking time. So what? That doesn't mean that Sharonda Williams received payment from Nike for "consulting services", which is what was originally alleged. The University conducted its initial compliance review and now this investigation and have found nothing. Sooooo...unless something concrete surfaces, there's nothing to be concerned about.

    The contract negation dispute with the marketing firm Zion signed with during the school year strikes me as more weird and troubling giving it's timing...and really, really poor decision-making by the family.
    Now Avenatti says: "And if what I'm saying is untrue, I challenge Coach K and Duke University to file a defamation lawsuit against me tomorrow and we can let the chips fall where they may."

    Oh my, a peeing contest with a skunk that keeps the story alive for another 18 months. No thank you.
    Sage Grouse

    ---------------------------------------
    'When I got on the bus for my first road game at Duke, I saw that every player was carrying textbooks or laptops. I coached in the SEC for 25 years, and I had never seen that before, not even once.' - David Cutcliffe to Duke alumni in Washington, DC, June 2013

  15. #275
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Rent free in tarheels’ heads
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Now Avenatti says: "And if what I'm saying is untrue, I challenge Coach K and Duke University to file a defamation lawsuit against me tomorrow and we can let the chips fall where they may."

    Oh my, a peeing contest with a skunk that keeps the story alive for another 18 months. No thank you.
    This fella is certifiable.
    “Coach said no 3s.” - Zion on The Block

  16. #276
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by sagegrouse View Post
    Now Avenatti says: "And if what I'm saying is untrue, I challenge Coach K and Duke University to file a defamation lawsuit against me tomorrow and we can let the chips fall where they may."

    Oh my, a peeing contest with a skunk that keeps the story alive for another 18 months. No thank you.
    As the kids say, “keep our name outta your mouth!”

  17. #277
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Chapel Hill
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    Read the Duke statement very carefully. Remember, it was written by a lawyer. Everywhere it would have been in Duke’s interest for the statement to be broader, it with would have been if it could have been, or would have said “the scope of the investigation did not include . . .”

  18. #278
    Quote Originally Posted by Sixthman View Post
    Read the Duke statement very carefully. Remember, it was written by a lawyer. Everywhere it would have been in Duke’s interest for the statement to be broader, it with would have been if it could have been, or would have said “the scope of the investigation did not include . . .”
    Almost Mueller-like. Lawyers tend to be quite careful. As I said above, they sound satisfied that there is no threat to Zion's eligibility. That means a very specific thing.

  19. #279
    If Ms. Williams is the employee of a shoe company--so what? It's a free country, as they say. The only issue for Duke is did Zion Williamson do something that would make him, himself ineligible, like, I don't know, take a chicken sandwich from a booster.
    I agree with a poster above, that for Zion his kerfuffle with signing with one rep, then ditching her for what looked like a better deal, is more problematic. Since this is a Duke board, we tend to take a "Duke side" on things, but I think that sports rep has reason to complain. She is not some fly-by-night relative that came out of the woodwork, but a well-established and successful rep for other sports stars.

  20. #280
    Quote Originally Posted by scottdude8 View Post
    In the ESPN.com article on the matter, Avenatti had some pretty bold statements on the matter, and seems to be sticking to his guns 100%.

    https://es.pn/2ZKtzO0

    I know the guy is a slime ball, and this investigation should make me feel better about all this. But the fact that he seems to be doubling down in the face of this new investigation leaves me the tiniest bit anxious about this whole thing again. The guy has to know he’s standing on the absolute last legs of his credibility, so would this really be the hill he chooses to die on without some confidence?

    Someone please convince me I’m wrong so I can sleep soundly tonight.
    The fallacy in the reasoning behind your concern is assuming that Avenatti has any credibility. He doesn't. He's resorted to trumpeting all sorts of accusations now, hoping that some idiot will publish what he says... Because if someone writes about it, 'there must be some fire behind that smoke'. But the problem here is, it isn't smoke—it's simply stream spewing out of Avenatti's mouth, which he's incapable of shutting.

    Avenatti would be wise to heed the advice that my wife gives our kids when they start sticking their proverbial feet in their mouths—"Just stop talking!"

Similar Threads

  1. An athlete's major shown?
    By dBlock in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-09-2016, 03:56 AM
  2. last night's UNC game--will it be shown again soon?
    By bluedevilallie in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-08-2015, 09:19 PM
  3. Sex Abuse Allegation at Syracuse Basketball
    By Indoor66 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 12-07-2011, 11:15 AM
  4. The Hoax (spoiler, but so what?)
    By Jim3k in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-10-2007, 03:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •