You Fans Don't Mean a Thing to Me!!!!!
- Thread starter pickled cat
- Start date
So, if the school is providing a scholarship for the players to help them graduate, what about Jon Toth? What if he decided to skip the bowl game because he wants to train for the NFL draft? He has graduated, he fulfilled his obligation of taking that money and receiving a degree. Would the opinion be different?
Pay the players. Let them share in the Bowl Bonanza Money. It obviously wouldn't compensate for a major injury but from a philosophical perspective it would be a start.
A
anon_q409idbs5m40a
Guest
At what point does it stop? What if the entire backfield for a team chose to sit out a bowl game, or the entire front four? These kids are on scholarship to play football and it doesn't mean you can pick and choose if you want to sit out.
A
anon_q409idbs5m40a
Guest
No, I have no idea. I don't watch TV or check in on the internet. Completely blind to what's going on. Never fails that whenever one brings up a HYPOTHETICAL situation that has a possibility of coming to fruition that someone just has to make everyone think they know more. Totally aware that it's all of two players, but what IF it comes to about 20 the next season?
True in a lot of cases, UK included, but then at a lot of schools not even football makes money, and almost none of the mandated sports. Of course at schools like jurich's it is the only purpose of sports, that and winning-------which go hand in hand.
Yes, I always thought that "Stevie got loose" should have maybe doubled Joker's recruiting budget when he signed his $30,000,000 plus contract, since my guess is that he did more than anyone else to get him into the NFL. And it would have only taken about 1% of his contract, AND could have been a tax writeoff in some way.
Here is the problem: right now college basketball has a relatively meaningless regular season. Sure, the games are fun to watch and they can help RPI and get you a better seed, but if you want a chance to play for a title technically all you have to do is have one good weekend at the end of the regular season and you're in. In college football the regular season is pretty much everything (obviously). If you lose more than 2 games you are not playing for a title. It's over. Having a system so reliant upon the regular season means that for the vast majority of the teams the bowl games are really just another game and are largely for pride more than anything else. The trick at fixing this is finding a way to balance the regular season being meaningful while still getting the highest possible amount of teams into the college football playoff. I don't think you can add too many more teams before you get to that point.
So, do you then just stop playing bowl games altogether and have only 8 teams make the post season, or do we continue these rather meaningless consolation prizes?
Well I think you know my answer from my post. Dump the bowls. And ditch the conference basketball tournaments. It does absolutely nothing for Kentucky as has been shown repeatedly.
But dumping the conference championships really doesn't make the regular season that much more important. I mean, our loss to Louisville last week really doesn't matter. Might hurt seeding some, but as long as we do okay in the conference schedule we'll make the tournament and get a chance to compete for a title. Obviously basketball has a lot more games and that makes them less valuable, but the more teams in the post season the less important the regular season becomes. Something like 24 teams get into the FCS playoffs, and you had several 7-4 teams in the playoff and even one 6-5 team. Not sure what route those teams took to get into the playoff, but they were there and they had a chance to play for a title. So, every game wasn't quite as important as they are now.
I would also worry about how it would effect recruiting. I have a feeling that it would create an even wider gap between teams like Kentucky and say Alabama.
Schools make a much bigger investment in football than the annual cost of 85 scholarships.
Does an 18 year old HS football player benefit from the education, tutoring, facilities, marketing, training, coaching, nutrition, etc., provided by a University, or is he the same player and person at 21 without ever having gone and played at a U?
They don't make anything, just like they're not paid anything now. Just like swimming, cross country, tennis. There are plenty of college sports with scholarships and no fans.
I bet you can guess the answer, probably damn few and far between. I know when UK built its ballyhooed Joe Craft Center, they published the list of donors and there was a grand total of ONE former basketball player on the list, Sam Bowie. There are way too many pro athletes who end up flat broke anyway, if schools had to depend on rich ex NFL and NBA and MLB players for substantial donations, there wouldn't be a lot of money to pass around.
I want to see the NCAAT slashed to 32 as well. Hell....16 really. You play 30+ reg season games, its pretty obvious who deserves a shot at the title and who doesn't. Ole Miss a few years ago or Georgia in 08 getting hot in Atlanta and running the SECT getting them a shot at the title is idiotic.
The investment in college football per player far exceeds the investment in swimming, cross country and tennis, and the college football players who excel stand to gain much more from that greater investment. Makes sense, does it not?