Off Topic · OT: Good NYT Article on NCAA's Profiting off Student Athletes (page 1)
BigSm00th @ 7/4/2009 2:26 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/04/sports...
Tne of the best parts about being the quarterback for Arizona State was the thrill that Sam Keller got whenever he played NCAA Football, the popular video game from Electronic Arts.
Nati Harnik/Associated Press
Sam Keller said he used to enjoy playing himself in EA Sports’ NCAA Football 2005.
Although Keller’s name did not appear in the game, there was little doubt that he was the inspiration for the Arizona State quarterback in its 2005 edition. The virtual player shared Keller’s jersey number, 9, as well as his height, weight, skin tone, hair color and home state. The virtual quarterback even had the same playing style, as a pocket passer. “That was what made it so cool,” said Keller, who transferred to Nebraska in 2006. “It was so blatant.”
Keller has since come to view his appearance in the video game in a different light: as exploitation. He filed a class-action lawsuit this spring against Electronic Arts and the National Collegiate Athletic Association, arguing that they illegally profit from the images of college football and basketball players. Ryan Hart, a former Rutgers quarterback, filed a similar lawsuit against Electronic Arts earlier this week in a New Jersey state court.
“We signed a paper at the beginning of college saying we couldn’t benefit from our name,” said Keller, who is now 24 and living in Scottsdale, Ariz. “So why was the N.C.A.A. turning a blind eye to this and allowing EA Sports to take our likenesses and make big bucks off it?”
The N.C.A.A. has long enforced strict rules barring its athletes from cashing in on their celebrity status at the same time that it earned millions of dollars through licensing deals, like those for jerseys, that some say did just that. Now athletes are challenging in court for the right to control the use of their images.
Other athletes have successfully sued over the right to profit from their likenesses, including a group of retired N.F.L. players who sued their union for allowing Electronic Arts to use their identities in Madden NFL without compensating them. In November, a jury awarded more than 2,000 retired players $28.1 million. The award was reduced to $26.25 million in a settlement.
The case of the college athletes is more serious, said Richard Karcher, the director of the Center for Law and Sports at the Florida Coastal School of Law. “It’s more egregious when third parties are profiting off of amateur athletes,” he said.
Legal experts said it would be difficult to quantify how much the likenesses of college players are worth, but by comparison, the N.F.L. players union earned more than $35 million in royalties from Electronic Arts in 2008. Robert Carey, Keller’s lawyer, said college athletes could be compensated in ways that do not violate their amateur status, such as by placing the royalty payments in a trust or paying for graduate education.
In a statement, the N.C.A.A. said the complaints were without merit and that the video games did not violate N.C.A.A. rules. A spokesman for Electronic Arts declined to comment, citing the pending lawsuits. The lawsuits come as the N.C.A.A. is considering loosening restrictions on the marketing of individual players. Christine Plonsky, director of women’s athletics at the University of Texas, argued that there was no harm in showcasing the talents of individual athletes, within limits. She and her colleagues “don’t view uses of their imagery as exploitative, but mere evidence of participation,” she said in an e-mail message.
But Amy Perko, executive director of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, an independent watchdog group, said profiting from the use of athletes’ images veered too far from amateurism. “If that line is erased, it puts the whole enterprise on the slippery slope toward further professionalization,” she said.
Perko and others see the video games as the most extreme examples of the commercialization of individual athletes. The N.C.A.A. and its member universities have licensing agreements that allow Electronic Arts to publish three college-themed video games: NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball and NCAA March Madness.
Unlike video games for professional sports leagues, the games for N.C.A.A. sports do not use players’ names. But even casual fans of college sports would recognize the athletes depicted in them. In NCAA Football 2009, the quarterback for the University of Florida is left-handed, stands 6 feet 3 inches, and wears No. 15, just like the Gators’ Tim Tebow, one of college football’s biggest stars. While the electronic player’s hometown is different — Tebow is from Jacksonville, not Brandon — each is from Florida.
Fans can download player rosters from other users via an online feature set up by Electronic Arts. Once the names are downloaded, they automatically appear on the back of jerseys. Several legal experts said that Keller and Hart made a persuasive case that Electronic Arts violated their right of publicity, which prevents the commercial use of someone’s likeness without that person’s consent. Celebrities have prevailed in similar cases, including one in which the game show hostess Vanna White sued Samsung for using a robot that resembled her in an advertisement.
The N.C.A.A. would not disclose its earnings from video game royalties. But they are a significant source of income for the association and the universities, said Martin Brochstein, senior vice president of the International Licensing Industry Merchandisers’ Association, a trade group. A 2008 survey conducted by his group found that video-game royalties represented the second-largest category in earnings from collegiate licensing deals, behind apparel.
“Video games have been one of the biggest categories for some time now,” he said.
Plonsky and others contend that the Internet and mobile technology demand new types of information, and that colleges should be allowed to do more to promote marquee players. Plonsky served on an N.C.A.A. committee that looked into relaxing the rules that she said would only be an extension of the existing reality, in which colleges collect fees from sponsors and television networks that showcase the performances of athletes. “In no way was a student-athlete compromised,” she said.
Under the proposed changes, commercial sponsors would be able to highlight an individual player but only by using game footage and only if the player was not portrayed as directly endorsing a product. Although the changes would require students to give their consent, they would not be paid.
One of the twists in the debate over video games is that the very players who are supposedly the victims are some of the games’ biggest fans. Jason Kelce, an offensive guard for the University of Cincinnati, said he agreed with the spirit of Keller and Hart’s lawsuits. “I don’t think it’s fair for college athletes over all,” he said.
Still, Kelce said he and his teammates were counting the days until July 14, when Electronic Arts will release the latest version of NCAA Football. “We end up playing it nonstop for like four months,” he said.
Tne of the best parts about being the quarterback for Arizona State was the thrill that Sam Keller got whenever he played NCAA Football, the popular video game from Electronic Arts.
Nati Harnik/Associated Press
Sam Keller said he used to enjoy playing himself in EA Sports’ NCAA Football 2005.
Although Keller’s name did not appear in the game, there was little doubt that he was the inspiration for the Arizona State quarterback in its 2005 edition. The virtual player shared Keller’s jersey number, 9, as well as his height, weight, skin tone, hair color and home state. The virtual quarterback even had the same playing style, as a pocket passer. “That was what made it so cool,” said Keller, who transferred to Nebraska in 2006. “It was so blatant.”
Keller has since come to view his appearance in the video game in a different light: as exploitation. He filed a class-action lawsuit this spring against Electronic Arts and the National Collegiate Athletic Association, arguing that they illegally profit from the images of college football and basketball players. Ryan Hart, a former Rutgers quarterback, filed a similar lawsuit against Electronic Arts earlier this week in a New Jersey state court.
“We signed a paper at the beginning of college saying we couldn’t benefit from our name,” said Keller, who is now 24 and living in Scottsdale, Ariz. “So why was the N.C.A.A. turning a blind eye to this and allowing EA Sports to take our likenesses and make big bucks off it?”
The N.C.A.A. has long enforced strict rules barring its athletes from cashing in on their celebrity status at the same time that it earned millions of dollars through licensing deals, like those for jerseys, that some say did just that. Now athletes are challenging in court for the right to control the use of their images.
Other athletes have successfully sued over the right to profit from their likenesses, including a group of retired N.F.L. players who sued their union for allowing Electronic Arts to use their identities in Madden NFL without compensating them. In November, a jury awarded more than 2,000 retired players $28.1 million. The award was reduced to $26.25 million in a settlement.
The case of the college athletes is more serious, said Richard Karcher, the director of the Center for Law and Sports at the Florida Coastal School of Law. “It’s more egregious when third parties are profiting off of amateur athletes,” he said.
Legal experts said it would be difficult to quantify how much the likenesses of college players are worth, but by comparison, the N.F.L. players union earned more than $35 million in royalties from Electronic Arts in 2008. Robert Carey, Keller’s lawyer, said college athletes could be compensated in ways that do not violate their amateur status, such as by placing the royalty payments in a trust or paying for graduate education.
In a statement, the N.C.A.A. said the complaints were without merit and that the video games did not violate N.C.A.A. rules. A spokesman for Electronic Arts declined to comment, citing the pending lawsuits. The lawsuits come as the N.C.A.A. is considering loosening restrictions on the marketing of individual players. Christine Plonsky, director of women’s athletics at the University of Texas, argued that there was no harm in showcasing the talents of individual athletes, within limits. She and her colleagues “don’t view uses of their imagery as exploitative, but mere evidence of participation,” she said in an e-mail message.
But Amy Perko, executive director of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, an independent watchdog group, said profiting from the use of athletes’ images veered too far from amateurism. “If that line is erased, it puts the whole enterprise on the slippery slope toward further professionalization,” she said.
Perko and others see the video games as the most extreme examples of the commercialization of individual athletes. The N.C.A.A. and its member universities have licensing agreements that allow Electronic Arts to publish three college-themed video games: NCAA Football, NCAA Basketball and NCAA March Madness.
Unlike video games for professional sports leagues, the games for N.C.A.A. sports do not use players’ names. But even casual fans of college sports would recognize the athletes depicted in them. In NCAA Football 2009, the quarterback for the University of Florida is left-handed, stands 6 feet 3 inches, and wears No. 15, just like the Gators’ Tim Tebow, one of college football’s biggest stars. While the electronic player’s hometown is different — Tebow is from Jacksonville, not Brandon — each is from Florida.
Fans can download player rosters from other users via an online feature set up by Electronic Arts. Once the names are downloaded, they automatically appear on the back of jerseys. Several legal experts said that Keller and Hart made a persuasive case that Electronic Arts violated their right of publicity, which prevents the commercial use of someone’s likeness without that person’s consent. Celebrities have prevailed in similar cases, including one in which the game show hostess Vanna White sued Samsung for using a robot that resembled her in an advertisement.
The N.C.A.A. would not disclose its earnings from video game royalties. But they are a significant source of income for the association and the universities, said Martin Brochstein, senior vice president of the International Licensing Industry Merchandisers’ Association, a trade group. A 2008 survey conducted by his group found that video-game royalties represented the second-largest category in earnings from collegiate licensing deals, behind apparel.
“Video games have been one of the biggest categories for some time now,” he said.
Plonsky and others contend that the Internet and mobile technology demand new types of information, and that colleges should be allowed to do more to promote marquee players. Plonsky served on an N.C.A.A. committee that looked into relaxing the rules that she said would only be an extension of the existing reality, in which colleges collect fees from sponsors and television networks that showcase the performances of athletes. “In no way was a student-athlete compromised,” she said.
Under the proposed changes, commercial sponsors would be able to highlight an individual player but only by using game footage and only if the player was not portrayed as directly endorsing a product. Although the changes would require students to give their consent, they would not be paid.
One of the twists in the debate over video games is that the very players who are supposedly the victims are some of the games’ biggest fans. Jason Kelce, an offensive guard for the University of Cincinnati, said he agreed with the spirit of Keller and Hart’s lawsuits. “I don’t think it’s fair for college athletes over all,” he said.
Still, Kelce said he and his teammates were counting the days until July 14, when Electronic Arts will release the latest version of NCAA Football. “We end up playing it nonstop for like four months,” he said.
Ira @ 7/4/2009 6:25 AM
Brandon Jennings spent a year playing in Europe. He did it because of academic ineligibility. But high school players will start to realize that they can make money playing basketball and still get drafted if they play in Europe instead of going to college. The ncaa rips off young men. Colleges don't let players into their arena for free. They don't give away the tv rights. They profit enormously from their play. Therefore, they should compensate them.
martin @ 7/4/2009 9:05 AM
Posted by Ira:
Brandon Jennings spent a year playing in Europe. He did it because of academic ineligibility. But high school players will start to realize that they can make money playing basketball and still get drafted if they play in Europe instead of going to college. The ncaa rips off young men. Colleges don't let players into their arena for free. They don't give away the tv rights. They profit enormously from their play. Therefore, they should compensate them.
i think this is oversimplified. How do you think new stadiums are bought? Or other less popular sports are funded? Or all of the other scholarship kids who will never make it to the pros are funded?
Nalod @ 7/4/2009 10:50 AM
Brandon Jennings and others can go "make money" enroute to the NBA.
One cannot assume there is an open ETM machine for every potential player who can be thought of as a prospect.
Jennings went tenth. He was evaluated based on his game. The kid who is playing in Israel forgoing his senior year in high school is only making a few hundred thousand a year. Nice money, but injury and lack of development can hurt what he thinks will be a very very high draft pick.
I can see only ten players a year even being desirable enough to jump to the europro. We think just cuz they american they are that good? With posssible language and other issues its worth a team to pay a kid for one year and upset the balance of the team?
There are some nice places to play, but there are more lousey ones also.
One cannot assume there is an open ETM machine for every potential player who can be thought of as a prospect.
Jennings went tenth. He was evaluated based on his game. The kid who is playing in Israel forgoing his senior year in high school is only making a few hundred thousand a year. Nice money, but injury and lack of development can hurt what he thinks will be a very very high draft pick.
I can see only ten players a year even being desirable enough to jump to the europro. We think just cuz they american they are that good? With posssible language and other issues its worth a team to pay a kid for one year and upset the balance of the team?
There are some nice places to play, but there are more lousey ones also.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 12:08 PM
again...
college athletics should be for those who want a college education, not a pro-sports career.
i am very much against using college athletics for young folks to make "the pros."
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 12:09 PM]
college athletics should be for those who want a college education, not a pro-sports career.
i am very much against using college athletics for young folks to make "the pros."
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 12:09 PM]
bitty41 @ 7/4/2009 12:13 PM
Posted by martin:Posted by Ira:
Brandon Jennings spent a year playing in Europe. He did it because of academic ineligibility. But high school players will start to realize that they can make money playing basketball and still get drafted if they play in Europe instead of going to college. The ncaa rips off young men. Colleges don't let players into their arena for free. They don't give away the tv rights. They profit enormously from their play. Therefore, they should compensate them.
i think this is oversimplified. How do you think new stadiums are bought? Or other less popular sports are funded? Or all of the other scholarship kids who will never make it to the pros are funded?
Yea there is a bit problematic because if you have a Men's basketball team that generates large amounts of revenue should they get paid while the woman's Volleyball team gets no money? Is that fair to everyone especially when your still talking about amateur athletes.
BRIGGS @ 7/4/2009 12:51 PM
Getting to go to school for free is a darn good benefit. That's 25-40k right there. If you pay 1 student athlete you must pay all. I think the free board/tuition is very fair. You should be honored that you are good enough to play sports at that level and go to school for free. That puts you in a 1% class
orangeblobman @ 7/4/2009 1:40 PM
What about the REAL students that go to college to...::gasp:: STUDY?? What of their intangible losses because colleges throw money and scholarships at sports, on kids that have no interest in learning anything at all.
The NCAA sports system has to go, but it's not because they 'profit' off 'student' athletes.
The NCAA sports system has to go, but it's not because they 'profit' off 'student' athletes.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 1:49 PM
haha...25-40k?
compare that to what jennings made last year.
sorry, not even close.
and how much are the schools making?
and what about the negative effects of things like what happened with rose and mayo?
the money is out there, but the players aren't getting it. and even if lower pro-players don't get as much, at least give them the option like the rest of the working world, to get paid for their work in real money.
why do baseball players not have to go to college? what about pro-soccer players around the world?
the window for an athlete to earn money from their ability is short, so why play for free? most don't even finish their education now-a-days, making the scholarships even less valuable.
but if you want to play that way, then why not just pay the players money?
why do you have to be a full-time post-secondary level student to become a pro-basketball player (or perhaps even worse, a pro-football player, since their careers are even shorter)?
also, regular students are there to get their degree for whatever it is they want to do (supposedly, although we know this doesn't happen as most people are conditioned to think they have to go to college immediately after high school) but basketball players not only have to do all of the school work other students do -- meaning they are supposed to be held to the same standards -- but also spend a huge amount of their time focused on playing the sport, which is what most are focused on to be there real profession.
it really makes no sense for pro-sports players to go to college.
if i told you that if you wanted to enter any other profession and told you your only option would be to go to school for free for a degree that isn't even going to directly help you in your professional interests immediately following school, and earn zero money, what would you think of that?
sound fair?
only if you aren't seeing it from the prospective of a person who is a viable pro-athlete.
also, if we got rid of silly high level college athletics, young players could earn more money, nba teams could have a real development system that could be specifically catered to their own organizational interests, allowing for years of development under their wing, rather than a college who only seeks to keep their own fan base happy and ensure that they are constantly hyped as a top school for athletes, which may not fit the needs of pro-teams.
we can see that clearly happening already.
briggs, sorry, you are WAAAAAAYY off-base here.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:54 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:06 PM]
compare that to what jennings made last year.
sorry, not even close.
and how much are the schools making?
and what about the negative effects of things like what happened with rose and mayo?
the money is out there, but the players aren't getting it. and even if lower pro-players don't get as much, at least give them the option like the rest of the working world, to get paid for their work in real money.
why do baseball players not have to go to college? what about pro-soccer players around the world?
the window for an athlete to earn money from their ability is short, so why play for free? most don't even finish their education now-a-days, making the scholarships even less valuable.
but if you want to play that way, then why not just pay the players money?
why do you have to be a full-time post-secondary level student to become a pro-basketball player (or perhaps even worse, a pro-football player, since their careers are even shorter)?
also, regular students are there to get their degree for whatever it is they want to do (supposedly, although we know this doesn't happen as most people are conditioned to think they have to go to college immediately after high school) but basketball players not only have to do all of the school work other students do -- meaning they are supposed to be held to the same standards -- but also spend a huge amount of their time focused on playing the sport, which is what most are focused on to be there real profession.
it really makes no sense for pro-sports players to go to college.
if i told you that if you wanted to enter any other profession and told you your only option would be to go to school for free for a degree that isn't even going to directly help you in your professional interests immediately following school, and earn zero money, what would you think of that?
sound fair?
only if you aren't seeing it from the prospective of a person who is a viable pro-athlete.
also, if we got rid of silly high level college athletics, young players could earn more money, nba teams could have a real development system that could be specifically catered to their own organizational interests, allowing for years of development under their wing, rather than a college who only seeks to keep their own fan base happy and ensure that they are constantly hyped as a top school for athletes, which may not fit the needs of pro-teams.
we can see that clearly happening already.
briggs, sorry, you are WAAAAAAYY off-base here.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:54 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:06 PM]
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 1:52 PM
exactly, obm.
if you are a "REAL" student, do you really want other students in your class, which you pay a lot of money to go to, to not give a crap about being in the class?
that lowers the level of one's education.
i've experienced that in college and even grad school (sadly) and is one of the reasons i don't think people should feel that they HAVE to go to college immediately following high school, because it's not cheap, most young folks don't understand the kind of debt they are getting into, and see college as more about socializing and partying with some focus on school but too many do not.
if you are a "REAL" student, do you really want other students in your class, which you pay a lot of money to go to, to not give a crap about being in the class?
that lowers the level of one's education.
i've experienced that in college and even grad school (sadly) and is one of the reasons i don't think people should feel that they HAVE to go to college immediately following high school, because it's not cheap, most young folks don't understand the kind of debt they are getting into, and see college as more about socializing and partying with some focus on school but too many do not.
bitty41 @ 7/4/2009 1:54 PM
Posted by orangeblobman:
What about the REAL students that go to college to...::gasp:: STUDY?? What of their intangible losses because colleges throw money and scholarships at sports, on kids that have no interest in learning anything at all.
The NCAA sports system has to go, but it's not because they 'profit' off 'student' athletes.
I was a full scholarship athlete and graduated with a pretty high GPA so what's your point? Matter of fact the average GPA of our entire team was like a 3.2 using a few bad apples to paint all collegiate athletes is pretty idiotic. Did we have jocks that didn't goto class yes but there was also plenty of non-athletes who weren't going to class.
Besides you are the last person on this board to be talking about someone else not studying judging by some of your comments.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 1:57 PM
basically, for pro-caliber athletes, sports is not a game, it's work.
which seems to go over the head of far too many folks who continually see sports as a just a game.
we rail on eddy curry, or rubio or jennings for being "cry babies" or "naturally good with no passion" but if you were negotiating your own salary for your own job in a different career, i highly doubt most would be saying the same thing.
i know too many people who "found their way" into a job or a career because they were pushed to do it by others, it was in their family background, they had a natural ability, etc. but they don't really love their jobs.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:01 PM]
which seems to go over the head of far too many folks who continually see sports as a just a game.
we rail on eddy curry, or rubio or jennings for being "cry babies" or "naturally good with no passion" but if you were negotiating your own salary for your own job in a different career, i highly doubt most would be saying the same thing.
i know too many people who "found their way" into a job or a career because they were pushed to do it by others, it was in their family background, they had a natural ability, etc. but they don't really love their jobs.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:01 PM]
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 2:00 PM
Posted by bitty41:Posted by orangeblobman:
What about the REAL students that go to college to...::gasp:: STUDY?? What of their intangible losses because colleges throw money and scholarships at sports, on kids that have no interest in learning anything at all.
The NCAA sports system has to go, but it's not because they 'profit' off 'student' athletes.
I was a full scholarship athlete and graduated with a pretty high GPA so what's your point? Matter of fact the average GPA of our entire team was like a 3.2 using a few bad apples to paint all collegiate athletes is pretty idiotic. Did we have jocks that didn't goto class yes but there was also plenty of non-athletes who weren't going to class.
Besides you are the last person on this board to be talking about someone else not studying judging by some of your comments.
absolutely, there are student-athletes that care about academics, but really that's not the immediate focus of most, unless they know they believe they aren't going to have real options for a pro-career.
i want to be clear that i didn't agree with obm about that part, however, being a jock who's not a super academic person should not be demeaning.
multiple intelligence theory supports the idea that it is a kind of intelligence or skill that we should respect.
bitty41 @ 7/4/2009 2:04 PM
Posted by PresIke:
basically, for pro-caliber athletes, sports is not a game, it's work.
which seems to go over the head of far too many folks who continually see sports as a just a game.
we rail on eddy curry, or rubio or jennings for being "cry babies" but if you were negotiating your own salary for your own job in a different career, i highly doubt most would be saying the same thing.
You don't think that some of Eddy's dysfunctions are due to his immaturity when he came into the league and his unpreparedness? If Eddy went to a major D1 program there is no way he would have survived being extremely over-weight the way he is, and his work ethic would have either changed or he would have been exposed.
bitty41 @ 7/4/2009 2:11 PM
Posted by PresIke:Posted by bitty41:Posted by orangeblobman:
What about the REAL students that go to college to...::gasp:: STUDY?? What of their intangible losses because colleges throw money and scholarships at sports, on kids that have no interest in learning anything at all.
The NCAA sports system has to go, but it's not because they 'profit' off 'student' athletes.
I was a full scholarship athlete and graduated with a pretty high GPA so what's your point? Matter of fact the average GPA of our entire team was like a 3.2 using a few bad apples to paint all collegiate athletes is pretty idiotic. Did we have jocks that didn't goto class yes but there was also plenty of non-athletes who weren't going to class.
Besides you are the last person on this board to be talking about someone else not studying judging by some of your comments.
absolutely, there are student-athletes that care about academics, but really that's not the immediate focus of most, unless they know they believe they aren't going to have real options for a pro-career.
i want to be clear that i didn't agree with obm about that part, however, being a jock who's not a super academic person should not be demeaning.
multiple intelligence theory supports the idea that it is a kind of intelligence or skill that we should respect.
Not everyone is cut out for college and that doesn't make you less intelligent and that shouldn't automatically hamper a pro career. But look at it from this perspective if you have a kid that's played in camps, AAU, and high school basketball isn't not going to be prepared for the Pro game. Unless a couple of things works in his favor his incredibly physically gifted, or ridiculous work ethic under the right tutelage. You might have a guy who has 3 or 4 seasons of success but flames out and maybe if he had the right development he could have had a 10 year career of good basketball.
The best college players out of high school Kobe, LBJ, and KG all we're either blessed with amazing athletic abilities and/or have serious work ethics.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 2:15 PM
possibly, but that speaks to the problem as well.
you are using the language or reality that is still in existence.
why do we need a major d1 program to teach him, when he could have played for a minor league type of team for the bulls, if it existed, to develop his game. the nba is THE highest level of play for b-ball, so eddy had to go from the high school level straight to the nba.
that's a HUGE leap that pro-sports like mlb and pro-soccer/football around the world NEVER ask their low level athletes to do.
i remember when manny ramirez came out of george washington high school to AA, and ripped it there quickly, then to AAA and then to the pro-level in a year or so.
but some players take years in A-AAA levels to reach the MLB level. at least they get paid for their work, and if they are believed to be a top prospect they get paid. there was that pitcher the yankees drafted years ago with the last name, taylor, who got (i believe) a $1 million dollar deal straight out of high school, but NEVER panned out, barely entering MLB if i recall correctly. at least he got paid for the potential.
no basketball player gets paid that kind of $ to play in the NBADL, or earns that much in college even with a scholarship.
maybe some who we think will be good don't pan out, so eddy could be someone like that, although he has shown the ability to do well at times on the highest level.
but imagine if the bulls had their own minor league team to develop curry.
D1 college programs may have some good coaches, but players at the highest level are usually only there for a year or 2, and the interests of a coach for a college is independent and different than that of a coach that works for a hypothetical minor league team under a bigger pro team.
you are using the language or reality that is still in existence.
why do we need a major d1 program to teach him, when he could have played for a minor league type of team for the bulls, if it existed, to develop his game. the nba is THE highest level of play for b-ball, so eddy had to go from the high school level straight to the nba.
that's a HUGE leap that pro-sports like mlb and pro-soccer/football around the world NEVER ask their low level athletes to do.
i remember when manny ramirez came out of george washington high school to AA, and ripped it there quickly, then to AAA and then to the pro-level in a year or so.
but some players take years in A-AAA levels to reach the MLB level. at least they get paid for their work, and if they are believed to be a top prospect they get paid. there was that pitcher the yankees drafted years ago with the last name, taylor, who got (i believe) a $1 million dollar deal straight out of high school, but NEVER panned out, barely entering MLB if i recall correctly. at least he got paid for the potential.
no basketball player gets paid that kind of $ to play in the NBADL, or earns that much in college even with a scholarship.
maybe some who we think will be good don't pan out, so eddy could be someone like that, although he has shown the ability to do well at times on the highest level.
but imagine if the bulls had their own minor league team to develop curry.
D1 college programs may have some good coaches, but players at the highest level are usually only there for a year or 2, and the interests of a coach for a college is independent and different than that of a coach that works for a hypothetical minor league team under a bigger pro team.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 2:23 PM
bitty, what i keep trying to say is we don't disagree about developing players.
that's one of my major points.
the nba would benefit, imho, from having a real minor league system instead of using ncaa hoops and high school as it for them.
the european approach to developing players is exactly why ricky rubio was playing for spain's natioanl team at 17. in european soccer, players start playing in youth/pro leagues at a very young age.
guess what, when i was VERY young I was a professional singer, and got PAID for my work. why is that not a problem, but for sports somehow we still need to see players go to college? if i became a pro-singer i probably wouldn't have cared as much about going to college. other young people good at certain skills that don't require a college degree may not go, or do so later, or other reasons.
my point is not to argue for high school straight to the nba, but high school, or even below, straight to some kind of pro league that focuses on developing players to be professionals at the highest levels.
then you can see who is ready to compete there and who is not, hence my point about rubio.
in soccer this happens all of the time, and is why we see someone like lebron go from high school to the highest level of the nba immediately.
remember jermaine oneal sat on the bench for 5 years, pretty much.
maybe he could have gotten better by being on a minor league team that developed him. nba teams are focused on winning games, so they can't often waste time, unless they truly stink and care less (usually not big market teams) playing the youngest players who aren't ready to play. so they have to just pick it up on their own. and maybe playing against nba players isn't the best way to develop some guys, and they need more seasoning. that's why we see some sit on the bench, which seems like a waste of roster space too.
there is a WEALTH of literature on the highest levels of academia that demonstrate the value of apprenticeship type of approach to teaching/developing young folks interested in a profession how to be that that this is the best way. nba teams #1 focus is not developing players. college teams may have some more interest in this to make sure their players can go to the nba, but the best players do not stay for long, even if they aren't ready, and do not share all of the interests of nba teams as they have more pressure to need to win games too. minor league baseball teams don't care as much about winning. their #1 concern has to be developing talent.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:25 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:27 PM]
that's one of my major points.
the nba would benefit, imho, from having a real minor league system instead of using ncaa hoops and high school as it for them.
the european approach to developing players is exactly why ricky rubio was playing for spain's natioanl team at 17. in european soccer, players start playing in youth/pro leagues at a very young age.
guess what, when i was VERY young I was a professional singer, and got PAID for my work. why is that not a problem, but for sports somehow we still need to see players go to college? if i became a pro-singer i probably wouldn't have cared as much about going to college. other young people good at certain skills that don't require a college degree may not go, or do so later, or other reasons.
my point is not to argue for high school straight to the nba, but high school, or even below, straight to some kind of pro league that focuses on developing players to be professionals at the highest levels.
then you can see who is ready to compete there and who is not, hence my point about rubio.
in soccer this happens all of the time, and is why we see someone like lebron go from high school to the highest level of the nba immediately.
remember jermaine oneal sat on the bench for 5 years, pretty much.
maybe he could have gotten better by being on a minor league team that developed him. nba teams are focused on winning games, so they can't often waste time, unless they truly stink and care less (usually not big market teams) playing the youngest players who aren't ready to play. so they have to just pick it up on their own. and maybe playing against nba players isn't the best way to develop some guys, and they need more seasoning. that's why we see some sit on the bench, which seems like a waste of roster space too.
there is a WEALTH of literature on the highest levels of academia that demonstrate the value of apprenticeship type of approach to teaching/developing young folks interested in a profession how to be that that this is the best way. nba teams #1 focus is not developing players. college teams may have some more interest in this to make sure their players can go to the nba, but the best players do not stay for long, even if they aren't ready, and do not share all of the interests of nba teams as they have more pressure to need to win games too. minor league baseball teams don't care as much about winning. their #1 concern has to be developing talent.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:25 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:27 PM]
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 2:31 PM
my other point is this would provide a lot more options, for viable work, for athletes who are not great at academics, but good players.
in basketball for american players it's pretty much the nba it's the nba or go to europe, and maybe the nbdl or some kind of rucker/and1 leagues. just because you can't play on the nba level doesn't mean you aren't good enough to be some kind of pro.
one of the young folks (he's 23) that i manage at my job over the summer is a former d1 player who is playing for some team here (not sure which or what league) and is aiming for europe.
why do all of them have to go there?
for baseball players, it's pretty much keep trying to make it in the minor leagues here, but basketball in america, leaves players with few options here.
in basketball for american players it's pretty much the nba it's the nba or go to europe, and maybe the nbdl or some kind of rucker/and1 leagues. just because you can't play on the nba level doesn't mean you aren't good enough to be some kind of pro.
one of the young folks (he's 23) that i manage at my job over the summer is a former d1 player who is playing for some team here (not sure which or what league) and is aiming for europe.
why do all of them have to go there?
for baseball players, it's pretty much keep trying to make it in the minor leagues here, but basketball in america, leaves players with few options here.
BRIGGS @ 7/4/2009 2:33 PM
Posted by PresIke:
haha...25-40k?
compare that to what jennings made last year.
sorry, not even close.
and how much are the schools making?
and what about the negative effects of things like what happened with rose and mayo?
the money is out there, but the players aren't getting it. and even if lower pro-players don't get as much, at least give them the option like the rest of the working world, to get paid for their work in real money.
why do baseball players not have to go to college? what about pro-soccer players around the world?
the window for an athlete to earn money from their ability is short, so why play for free? most don't even finish their education now-a-days, making the scholarships even less valuable.
but if you want to play that way, then why not just pay the players money?
why do you have to be a full-time post-secondary level student to become a pro-basketball player (or perhaps even worse, a pro-football player, since their careers are even shorter)?
also, regular students are there to get their degree for whatever it is they want to do (supposedly, although we know this doesn't happen as most people are conditioned to think they have to go to college immediately after high school) but basketball players not only have to do all of the school work other students do -- meaning they are supposed to be held to the same standards -- but also spend a huge amount of their time focused on playing the sport, which is what most are focused on to be there real profession.
it really makes no sense for pro-sports players to go to college.
if i told you that if you wanted to enter any other profession and told you your only option would be to go to school for free for a degree that isn't even going to directly help you in your professional interests immediately following school, and earn zero money, what would you think of that?
sound fair?
only if you aren't seeing it from the prospective of a person who is a viable pro-athlete.
also, if we got rid of silly high level college athletics, young players could earn more money, nba teams could have a real development system that could be specifically catered to their own organizational interests, allowing for years of development under their wing, rather than a college who only seeks to keep their own fan base happy and ensure that they are constantly hyped as a top school for athletes, which may not fit the needs of pro-teams.
we can see that clearly happening already.
briggs, sorry, you are WAAAAAAYY off-base here.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:54 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:06 PM]
I don't think you get it. What does a solider get for serving his country and risking his life? He doesnt even get what an athlete does for playing a sport in college. The upper echelon stars of amateur sports pave the way for everyone to get scholarships. And remember we are talking amateur--if you want to be a pro go do what Jennings did--you have that right. For an amateur to get a free ride to college is an absolute privilege and great compensation. Everything in life cannot be quantified in fiscal benefit. There are certain intangibles of college that have a huge intrinsic value that cannot be measured in dollars. People whop bring up the issue of whether some amateur players should be paid truly are naive.
bitty41 @ 7/4/2009 2:39 PM
Posted by PresIke:
possibly, but that speaks to the problem as well.
you are using the language or reality that is still in existence.
why do we need a major d1 program to teach him, when he could have played for a minor league type of team for the bulls, if it existed, to develop his game. the nba is THE highest level of play for b-ball, so eddy had to go from the high school level straight to the nba.
that's a HUGE leap that pro-sports like mlb and pro-soccer/football around the world NEVER ask their low level athletes to do.
i remember when manny ramirez came out of george washington high school to AA, and ripped it there quickly, then to AAA and then to the pro-level in a year or so.
but some players take years in A-AAA levels to reach the MLB level. at least they get paid for their work, and if they are believed to be a top prospect they get paid. there was that pitcher the yankees drafted years ago with the last name, taylor, who got (i believe) a $1 million dollar deal straight out of high school, but NEVER panned out, barely entering MLB if i recall correctly. at least he got paid for the potential.
no basketball player gets paid that kind of $ to play in the NBADL, or earns that much in college even with a scholarship.
maybe some who we think will be good don't pan out, so eddy could be someone like that, although he has shown the ability to do well at times on the highest level.
but imagine if the bulls had their own minor league team to develop curry.
D1 college programs may have some good coaches, but players at the highest level are usually only there for a year or 2, and the interests of a coach for a college is independent and different than that of a coach that works for a hypothetical minor league team under a bigger pro team.
imo I always found the baseball comparison faulty because baseball' system has been in place for nearly a century. You are talking about a complete revamping of the entire pro basketball infrastructure. I think you underestimate the value of a young person (anyone for that matter) would gain from college. Whether your a struggling C student or a potential summa cum laude there is still much to be learned from the college environment and I'm not talking just about the classroom.
If your talking about the minor league then you must mean everyone coming out of high school as to play for the minor league team. So someone like LBJ you send him to play on Idaho for the Cavs development team? Is that really a better alternative.
Also why must we continue to perpetuate the belief that athletes are only good at one thing. If a guy goes to a development league and blows his knee out what's left for him because he can't go back to college on a scholarship and what kind of great employment opportunities are out there for a high school graduate whose never taken one single college course? Even a player that has success what's after basketball....if that's all you've known since you were a kid. No one has taught you how to manage a check point, let alone make investments, and you'll have almost no opportunity to possibly move into another field because of your lack of education. So really the best he can hope for is saving his money that he made while a pro and using that to live off of for the rest of him and his family's life.
Now there's always exception to the rules but how many regular people walking around can find work with no college degree? I don't know about you but how many 18 year olds do you know of that are financially astute.
In terms of players leaving early I think there's a pressure to leave early. Because if you stay too long in college then draft scouts now perceive as though something is wrong with your game. That's how messed up the process has become it's detriment if a player has a college degree when entering the draft.
PresIke @ 7/4/2009 3:29 PM
Posted by BRIGGS:Posted by PresIke:
haha...25-40k?
compare that to what jennings made last year.
sorry, not even close.
and how much are the schools making?
and what about the negative effects of things like what happened with rose and mayo?
the money is out there, but the players aren't getting it. and even if lower pro-players don't get as much, at least give them the option like the rest of the working world, to get paid for their work in real money.
why do baseball players not have to go to college? what about pro-soccer players around the world?
the window for an athlete to earn money from their ability is short, so why play for free? most don't even finish their education now-a-days, making the scholarships even less valuable.
but if you want to play that way, then why not just pay the players money?
why do you have to be a full-time post-secondary level student to become a pro-basketball player (or perhaps even worse, a pro-football player, since their careers are even shorter)?
also, regular students are there to get their degree for whatever it is they want to do (supposedly, although we know this doesn't happen as most people are conditioned to think they have to go to college immediately after high school) but basketball players not only have to do all of the school work other students do -- meaning they are supposed to be held to the same standards -- but also spend a huge amount of their time focused on playing the sport, which is what most are focused on to be there real profession.
it really makes no sense for pro-sports players to go to college.
if i told you that if you wanted to enter any other profession and told you your only option would be to go to school for free for a degree that isn't even going to directly help you in your professional interests immediately following school, and earn zero money, what would you think of that?
sound fair?
only if you aren't seeing it from the prospective of a person who is a viable pro-athlete.
also, if we got rid of silly high level college athletics, young players could earn more money, nba teams could have a real development system that could be specifically catered to their own organizational interests, allowing for years of development under their wing, rather than a college who only seeks to keep their own fan base happy and ensure that they are constantly hyped as a top school for athletes, which may not fit the needs of pro-teams.
we can see that clearly happening already.
briggs, sorry, you are WAAAAAAYY off-base here.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:54 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 1:55 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 2:06 PM]
I don't think you get it. What does a solider get for serving his country and risking his life? He doesnt even get what an athlete does for playing a sport in college. The upper echelon stars of amateur sports pave the way for everyone to get scholarships. And remember we are talking amateur--if you want to be a pro go do what Jennings did--you have that right. For an amateur to get a free ride to college is an absolute privilege and great compensation. Everything in life cannot be quantified in fiscal benefit. There are certain intangibles of college that have a huge intrinsic value that cannot be measured in dollars. People whop bring up the issue of whether some amateur players should be paid truly are naive.
using the soldier/military comparison -- which also tends to exploit the least well off and educated (look at what the makeup is of who joins the military...it's mostlty the poorest and least educated) -- does not justify the system at all. if i said, well, slavery is legal somewhere else then therefore it must be okay would that be an acceptable way to justify it? i'm not saying this is slavery per say, but it sure is not the same as other work. again, what other legit examples are there of this? none. no other job asks this of its future workers.
not everyone who works in the military is not getting paid. actually, i believe they all get paid. some do get money for a degree but most are just using the military as a way to get a degree for some other future interest, not a lifelong military career.
some remain lifers, but not all.
again, most pro-caliber basketball players don't go to college, as their primary reason, for a college degree to work in another profession.
i challenge you to actually think like one of these people, because clearly you aren't.
how come universities around the world, widely reputed like oxford, cambridge, etc do not rely on college athletics to function and help others? why is it the responsiblity of potential pro athletes to carry the economic weight for other students?
actually, the problem is also that we put too many people in college who don't really want to be there or are not ready for it.
sorry bro, with all due respect, it is you who still don't get it.
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 3:31 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 3:42 PM]
[Edited by - PresIke on 07-04-2009 3:46 PM]
Page 1 of 5