Just lost respect for Tabor

[rogdochar]

Fulfill their demand to be paid a stipend and soon comes the demand to lower
hourly class requirements during football season.??

 

[Double Gator Dad]

Further clarity on the SOS comment.
Yes, he was talking about a stipend versus a salary but also, I don't believe he even meant what he said.
Steve said this when he was getting his a## kicked by doofus at Clemson and was simply sucking up to recruits.
People do stupid things when they are desperate.

 

[divits]

Except they can't. Fournette, Cook, etal can't go the free agent route if they wanted to. Nor could any high school stud. So would you be in support of removing that restriction? I would.

Yes, SOS supports the concept of paying players, albeit a small amount, but nonetheless the willingness to support that idea makes the point valid or at least gives that opinion credibility (the opinion that there is a problem).

I understand the "other sports" argument and I agree that it is a huge challenge, but that doesnt mean we just ignore the problem and say "oh well". My thought, is that the major programs will eventually break away from the NCAA, form their own league/entity/whatever that will shield them from Title IX limitations.

I don't think there should be any restrictions on someone's ability to make a living so of course players should be allowed to try out for the pros from HS if they want. But again, good luck with that.

SOS says a lot of things that are ridiculous. Just because he's Spurrier doesn't mean he knows what he's talking about. If it benefits him of course he'd be all for it.

As to your last paragraph, it's obvious you have no idea what Title IX entails. Starting another league will do nothing to change Title IX. You don't actually think that those schools will forgo federal funding, do you? Can you say "Pell Grants"?

"Title IX is a comprehensive federal law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in any federally funded education program or activity"

 

[Double Gator Dad]

I feel better knowing that at least most of the people on this topic understand the reality of the situation.

The players are highly compensated (school costs and Pell Grants if needed) and are actually very fortunate

Most schools don't have the money to pay even a stipend, only 16 turned a profit last year.

What happens when the women's volleyball team demands to be paid with a room full of Title IV lawyers in tow?

 

[Alagator]

Except they can't. Fournette, Cook, etal can't go the free agent route if they wanted to. Nor could any high school stud. So would you be in support of removing that restriction? I would.

Yes, SOS supports the concept of paying players, albeit a small amount, but nonetheless the willingness to support that idea makes the point valid or at least gives that opinion credibility (the opinion that there is a problem).

I understand the "other sports" argument and I agree that it is a huge challenge, but that doesnt mean we just ignore the problem and say "oh well". My thought, is that the major programs will eventually break away from the NCAA, form their own league/entity/whatever that will shield them from Title IX limitations.

Tabor? Tabor, is that you?

Glad to have some current players adding to our board. We're sure to get some real insider information now.

 

[CU-UF]

I'm quite familiar with Title IX. In much the way UF Health is not a University entity and is not subject to compliance with normal state and federal regulations that a university must meet, I don't think its that much of a stretch for these large athletic departments to create legal entities that fall in this category. Now to be clear, I really only believe this applies to the big 5 conferences.

And its not just SOS that has brought this up, it was brought up and discussed within the NCAA.

 

[divits]

I'm quite familiar with Title IX.

Nope, I really don't think ya' are.

Your Shands example has absolutely nothing to do with how universities can or can't get around Title IX. I don't care what kind of legal entity they want to call themselves, if any school in this new entity that you propose in any way shape or form takes one dollar of federal money they fall under Title IX.

Here's a little case law to illustrate my point.

http://www.aauw.org/2010/10/12/private-schools/

 

[Ancient Reptile]

Further clarity on the SOS comment.
Yes, he was talking about a stipend versus a salary but also, I don't believe he even meant what he said.
Steve said this when he was getting his a## kicked by doofus at Clemson and was simply sucking up to recruits.
People do stupid things when they are desperate.

Never seen Steve desperate.

 

[CU-UF]

Nope, I really don't think ya' are.

Your Shands example has absolutely nothing to do with how universities can or can't get around Title IX. I don't care what kind of legal entity they want to call themselves, if any school in this new entity that you propose in any way shape or form takes one dollar of federal money they fall under Title IX.

Here's a little case law to illustrate my point.

http://www.aauw.org/2010/10/12/private-schools/

I don't see the linkage of your case law example to my proposition. The citation refers to private schools still being held responsible for Title IX compliance. I have sat in many of a Title IX seminar, its about allowing equal access to education if the educational institution accepts federal funds. That's why there is increasing effort/education/policing about student rapes and their allegations because of the failure to create a safe educational environment.

If the athletic associations divest direct linkage to Universities ala UF Health (btw, its no longer called Shands) then Title IX does not apply.

 

[divits]

I don't see the linkage of your case law example to my proposition. The citation refers to private schools still being held responsible for Title IX compliance. I have sat in many of a Title IX seminar, its about allowing equal access to education if the educational institution accepts federal funds. That's why there is increasing effort/education/policing about student rapes and their allegations because of the failure to create a safe educational environment.

If the athletic associations divest direct linkage to Universities ala UF Health (btw, its no longer called Shands) then Title IX does not apply.

Baloney. I'm sure AD's all around the country would listen with rapt attention as to how this will be done and slap themselves for not having done it already.
No way, no how will schools in essence start their own pro sports teams. Because that's what this would be. To be truly independent they would have to pay licensing fees, stadium rent, and a whole slew of other fees and obligations to UF that are not really feasible. As it is, the UFAA already is a somewhat independent entity from the university. Why don't they just do what you propose and forget about Title IX? But that's just UF. In order for this to work every school would have to agree and comply. Even then, do really think the government would allow this attempted end run around Title IX? Forget it. And what do suppose the national reaction from the public, let alone the alumni, would be if this were to happen? This idea is fraught with all kinds of problems as to make unfeasible.

I'll ask again, are you willing to pay the extra money for tickets to fund this? Are we going to pay star players more than bench warmers? Are you willing to let smaller programs die on the vine?

My reason for the linked article was to show that if one institution in this new entity were to take one dollar in federal money for any reason at all the courts could rule that all members of that entity were non-compliant with Title IX. In this case, this new entity would be the same as the catholic diocese.

 

[CU-UF]

Take a look at MAJOR College football right now. I dont think something like this would be feasible for all college programs, just the major ones out of the power 5 conferences. These major programs are already exerting their influence on the sport and NCAA with the creation of the playoff. Look at the landscape now, you have to have your head buried in the sand not realize we are not in the good ol' days, their own TV networks (NFL network anyone?), multi-billion dollar contracts with TV and Cable networks, scheduling games for better TV ratings, multi-million dollar salaries to coaches and even assistant coaches, facilities on-par or better to professional facilities, 15 game seasons with talk of more (getting closer to NFL regular season length). Is it really that far of a stretch to stop and look around and say "college football and professional football are not really that different"? Now actually admitting it, people would suddenly be up in arms? Hypothetically, if UFAA became one of these pseudo professional entities distinct from the University, would you stop supporting the team? Perhaps, but I'm sure a fair number wouldn't flinch.

Getting back to the start of this discourse between you and me (there is a point ) what Tabor said was silly and stupid, just like a kid, but the intent of his comment was not idiotic or whatever name he has been called by some on this board. Just look at the trajectory that college football is on, there should be some discussion about it.

 

[Ancient Reptile]

My Dad attended college in the 1930s. He said then football players should be paid. What hasn't been discussed in this thread is the difficulty and the physical demands of the job. Even in the 1930s he said they were too tired to study after practice, and now we have player led practices throughout the year. Also, note should be taken of the growing number of ex-football players who encourage their sons to play sports but will not permit them to play football.

 

[ThreatMatrix]

Except they can't. Fournette, Cook, etal can't go the free agent route if they wanted to. Nor could any high school stud. So would you be in support of removing that restriction? I would.

Yes, SOS supports the concept of paying players, albeit a small amount, but nonetheless the willingness to support that idea makes the point valid or at least gives that opinion credibility (the opinion that there is a problem).

I understand the "other sports" argument and I agree that it is a huge challenge, but that doesnt mean we just ignore the problem and say "oh well". My thought, is that the major programs will eventually break away from the NCAA, form their own league/entity/whatever that will shield them from Title IX limitations.

Except they can. They just have to wait until they are 3 years removed from HS. They can go home and party for a year. Or get really heavy into cross fit. Whatever turns them on. Nothing says they have to stay in school and get free room and board from the "slave owners".

 

[Double Gator Dad]

Ancient,
Calling SOS desperate was probably a reach on my part but Steve was losing support in Columbia due to recruiting and he did hold that news conference about negative recruiting about his age that didn't come off well.
My point being that he knew he was losing the players and I think he made the comments with recruiting in mind

 

[MJMGator]

Except they can. They just have to wait until they are 3 years removed from HS. They can go home and party for a year. Or get really heavy into cross fit. Whatever turns them on. Nothing says they have to stay in school and get free room and board from the "slave owners".

I agree for the most part...especially the ones that are simply using college as a showcase/audition for the NFL. They are far from victims.
That said, the $500+ million take by the SEC is still an obscene amount of money.

 

[Ancient Reptile]

Ancient,
Calling SOS desperate was probably a reach on my part but Steve was losing support in Columbia due to recruiting and he did hold that news conference about negative recruiting about his age that didn't come off well.
My point being that he knew he was losing the players and I think he made the comments with recruiting in mind

No argument. It is just that I saw Steve play, and I saw him poised in desperate situations.

 

[ThreatMatrix]

I agree for the most part...especially the ones that are simply using college as a showcase/audition for the NFL. They are far from victims.
That said, the $500+ million take by the SEC is still an obscene amount of money.

You are confusing revenue with profit.