Okay, so let's talk N I L - Name Image Likeness

[savvyandsassier]

I would broadly agree with you.

The one thing that seems clear though is that there will be change. And I would argue -- just my opinion -- that people, such as Cory Booker will see the political capital in tying this to other ongoing issues he perceives -- as you put it -- as "noble and just."

That's what makes this so fascinating and, in its unique way, a microcosm of larger societal shifts.

Football will still be football and people on boards, such as this one will still lament the loss of 5-star recruits and Messiah coaches, but if the reward system shifts significantly, all may not benefit equally either. Which in a capitalist market-economy is exactly how things are designed to work.

And that for me is the question here. How much of a "free market" approach will be allowed vs. some kind of socialized regulation. Particularly, when you consider that a "free market" approach here might benefit the more materially disadvantaged vs. those who more often call the tune. The irony there would be STUNNING.

So, it's a boxing match I'm eager to see.

What CFB needs is a 14th amendment, so to speak, because the piece of human garbage plantation owners that run the sport are never going to voluntarily relinquish the key legal driver of their exploitation racket. That being essentially one thing, that laughable joke and crude weapon of 'amateurism' that they insist athletes formally agree and sign on the dotted line to when they accept scholarships.

And it was the destruction of that little clause in the scholarship paperwork that I thought was indeed going to be effectively destroyed by way of the original California legislation, and effectively that was the point of it, though I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of that legislation, but I thought that was the idea.

And the NCAA's response to that threat, genuinely evil institution that it is, is by coming up with their own version which attempts to forestall that by insisting that whatever is decided upon and deigned to be allowed to exist unmolested by the NCAA'S slave police, that 'amateurism' - as they define it and impose it- which is what modern-day sports slavery is, remains untouched. So none of this means shit until phony baloney amateurism is forcibly swept away once and for all.

And that's what the hold up is. As always the NCAA doesn't care about the sport, the players, the fans, nothing.... only its own legal prerogatives and abilities to openly exploit athletes and dominate the proceedings. So this ain't going anywhere until so-called amateurism is destroyed. And then naturally anybody can pay any player what they want, which is what the NCAA - a true force of downright evil in society - is dead set on opposing. Because that's their and has always been their only effective mission: to forcibly impoverish athletes and enrich themselves and member institutions. They are indeed the plantation, and athletes the slaves.

 

[4-4-3]

What CFB needs is a 14th amendment, so to speak, because the piece of human garbage plantation owners that run the sport are never going to voluntarily relinquish the key legal driver of their exploitation racket. That being essentially one thing, that laughable joke and crude weapon of 'amateurism' that they insist athletes formally agree and sign on the dotted line to when they accept scholarships.

And it was the destruction of that little clause in the scholarship paperwork that I thought was indeed going to be effectively destroyed by way of the original California legislation, and effectively that was the point of it, though I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of that legislation, but I thought that was the idea.

And the NCAA's response to that threat, genuinely evil institution that it is, is by coming up with their own version which attempts to forestall that by insisting that whatever is decided upon and deigned to be allowed to exist unmolested by the NCAA'S slave police, that 'amateurism' - as they define it and impose it- which is what modern-day sports slavery is, remains untouched. So none of this means shit until phony baloney amateurism is forcibly swept away once and for all.

And that's what the hold up is. As always the NCAA doesn't care about the sport, the players, the fans, nothing.... only its own legal prerogatives and abilities to openly exploit athletes and dominate the proceedings. So this ain't going anywhere until so-called amateurism is destroyed. And then naturally anybody can pay any player what they want, which is what the NCAA - a true force of downright evil in society - is dead set on opposing. Because that's their and has always been their only effective mission: to forcibly impoverish athletes and enrich themselves and member institutions. They are indeed the plantation, and athletes the slaves.

I don’t follow the NCAA, so I don’t have grounds to share your antipathy towards them, nor can I either dispute or vouch for the accuracy of what you’re charging them with. I simply don’t have the fact-base to offer even comment one as to their aims.

But speaking off the cuff, it looks like they’re protecting their turf which every organization – good or bad – does. The trick to accomplishing that, of course, is to prove in the MARKETPLACE that you haven’t outlived your usefulness.

But what IS clear to me is that Congress can supersede the NCAA if it so chooses. And for doing that, there appears to be considerable sentiment. Certainly no guarantee at this stage, but real plausibility that fundamental change will occur.

My interest is in how ND – and other institutions that may think similarly – will cope with what may result from this.

I see development along two tracks: 1) monetization and 2) social equity.

It’s been clear, starting with tennis in 1968 and, later, the Olympics in 1986, that amateurism per se would eventually give way entirely to professionalism. And what is professionalism but monetization? And as we’ve learned only too well over the last 40 years, whatever can be monetized will be monetized.

The only questions have been – and this applies equally to Wall Street, medicine, education and tech – a) who runs the game as concessionaire and b) who’s left schlepping the load?

As was the case in professional sports before free agency, the NCAA, its conferences and colleges now control college sports and, in effect, LET PLAYERS PLAY in return for free tuition, room and board. The players are now challenging that.

And given what now looks like a “democratization” wrinkle in monetization – as evidenced in developments, such as the GAMESTOP shorting fandango – the players, if they stand strong, have serious leverage here. And at the very least should garner a seat at the table.

And if most of Congress agrees with Senators Booker and Murphy, the players could wind up ECOMICALLY EMANCIPATED.

FULLY.

ND, as is the case with ALL other universities, has had ZERO PROBLEM with both the monetization and cartelization of higher education in general, in which students who've been saddled with debt are then sent out into a marketplace devoid of adequate opportunities.

So, what will ND's approach be here? Will it willingly concede part of its concessionary prerogative in the name of greater individual economic freedom, or would that threaten the whole structure that promotes ANYTHING BUT economic freedom for the average student?

Equally interesting is the question of how ND and/or other institutions will wish to frame economic emancipation for student athletes – should Congress require it.

Would ND support a system that favors superior athletes – who in many cases are more economically disadvantaged minorities – or one that "redistributes" the proceeds?

In other words, equality of opportunity – with minorities in the usual role of whites; or equality of outcome, with whites in the usual role of minorities. For an institution espousing social justice, that to me looks like CHINESE HANDCUFFS.

Not to mention that neither football nor anything-or-one else in ND-land is supposed to eclipse ND itself or the sanctity of the STUDENT FIRST concept. All of which begins to throw light on how fraught this all is and how the PERFECT could easily become the ENEMY OF THE GOOD either way.

What could happen, THEORETICALLY, is that ND and/or other universities decide they wish to continue doing things THE OLD FASHIONED way, while working out some modified deal with the NCAA that keeps them all in the driver’s seat. That is, assuming whatever law may get passed would allow that.

What will ND ACTUALLY DO? NO IDEA. But if it were me and I didn’t want this sort of change, I’d hire EVERY LAST LOBBIEST I COULD to pull EVERY LAST CONGRESSIONAL STRING WITHIN REACH.

And is that not a Jack Swarbrick type assignment? Or is that something finally ABOVE HIS PAY GRADE?

Sure looking forward to finding out!

 

[savvyandsassier]

I don’t follow the NCAA, so I don’t have grounds to share your antipathy towards them, nor can I either dispute or vouch for the accuracy of what you’re charging them with. I simply don’t have the fact-base to offer even comment one as to their aims.

But speaking off the cuff, it looks like they’re protecting their turf which every organization – good or bad – does. The trick to accomplishing that, of course, is to prove in the MARKETPLACE that you haven’t outlived your usefulness.

But what IS clear to me is that Congress can supersede the NCAA if it so chooses. And for doing that, there appears to be considerable sentiment. Certainly no guarantee at this stage, but real plausibility that fundamental change will occur.

My interest is in how ND – and other institutions that may think similarly – will cope with what may result from this.

I see development along two tracks: 1) monetization and 2) social equity.

It’s been clear, starting with tennis in 1968 and, later, the Olympics in 1986, that amateurism per se would eventually give way entirely to professionalism. And what is professionalism but monetization? And as we’ve learned only too well over the last 40 years, whatever can be monetized will be monetized.

The only questions have been – and this applies equally to Wall Street, medicine, education and tech – a) who runs the game as concessionaire and b) who’s left schlepping the load?

As was the case in professional sports before free agency, the NCAA, its conferences and colleges now control college sports and, in effect, LET PLAYERS PLAY in return for free tuition, room and board. The players are now challenging that.

And given what now looks like a “democratization” wrinkle in monetization – as evidenced in developments, such as the GAMESTOP shorting fandango – the players, if they stand strong, have serious leverage here. And at the very least should garner a seat at the table.

And if most of Congress agrees with Senators Booker and Murphy, the players could wind up ECOMICALLY EMANCIPATED.

FULLY.

ND, as is the case with ALL other universities, has had ZERO PROBLEM with both the monetization and cartelization of higher education in general, in which students who've been saddled with debt are then sent out into a marketplace devoid of adequate opportunities.

So, what will ND's approach be here? Will it willingly concede part of its concessionary prerogative in the name of greater individual economic freedom, or would that threaten the whole structure that promotes ANYTHING BUT economic freedom for the average student?

Equally interesting is the question of how ND and/or other institutions will wish to frame economic emancipation for student athletes – should Congress require it.

Would ND support a system that favors superior athletes – who in many cases are more economically disadvantaged minorities – or one that "redistributes" the proceeds?

In other words, equality of opportunity – with minorities in the usual role of whites; or equality of outcome, with whites in the usual role of minorities. For an institution espousing social justice, that to me looks like CHINESE HANDCUFFS.

Not to mention that neither football nor anything-or-one else in ND-land is supposed to eclipse ND itself or the sanctity of the STUDENT FIRST concept. All of which begins to throw light on how fraught this all is and how the PERFECT could easily become the ENEMY OF THE GOOD either way.

What could happen, THEORETICALLY, is that ND and/or other universities decide they wish to continue doing things THE OLD FASHIONED way, while working out some modified deal with the NCAA that keeps them all in the driver’s seat. That is, assuming whatever law may get passed would allow that.

What will ND ACTUALLY DO? NO IDEA. But if it were me and I didn’t want this sort of change, I’d hire EVERY LAST LOBBIEST I COULD to pull EVERY LAST CONGRESSIONAL STRING WITHIN REACH.

And is that not a Jack Swarbrick type assignment? Or is that something finally ABOVE HIS PAY GRADE?

Sure looking forward to finding out!

I do have antipathy, it's true, I apologize for being quite so vehement. But this subject really gets me going. Anyway, it's just like I said. Everything will hinge upon the whole amateurism thing, which the NCAA is desperate to maintain as if it's life itself. Which it probably is, quite frankly, for them.

 

[4-4-3]

I do have antipathy, it's true, I apologize for being quite so vehement. But this subject really gets me going. Anyway, it's just like I said. Everything will hinge upon the whole amateurism thing, which the NCAA is desperate to maintain as if it's life itself. Which it probably is, quite frankly, for them.

Nothing to apologize about. You've clearly staked out your position, and to me, it looks solid.

You're hunting the NCAA. I'm hunting the fundamental economics of college sports and college in general. You see the NCAA as a shameless plantation. I see academe as the most self-serving, self-sanitizing gravy train in history.

Outside, of course, of the Bolsheviks.

 

[BodiTheGreat]

I don’t follow the NCAA, so I don’t have grounds to share your antipathy towards them, nor can I either dispute or vouch for the accuracy of what you’re charging them with. I simply don’t have the fact-base to offer even comment one as to their aims.

But speaking off the cuff, it looks like they’re protecting their turf which every organization – good or bad – does. The trick to accomplishing that, of course, is to prove in the MARKETPLACE that you haven’t outlived your usefulness.

But what IS clear to me is that Congress can supersede the NCAA if it so chooses. And for doing that, there appears to be considerable sentiment. Certainly no guarantee at this stage, but real plausibility that fundamental change will occur.

My interest is in how ND – and other institutions that may think similarly – will cope with what may result from this.

I see development along two tracks: 1) monetization and 2) social equity.

It’s been clear, starting with tennis in 1968 and, later, the Olympics in 1986, that amateurism per se would eventually give way entirely to professionalism. And what is professionalism but monetization? And as we’ve learned only too well over the last 40 years, whatever can be monetized will be monetized.

The only questions have been – and this applies equally to Wall Street, medicine, education and tech – a) who runs the game as concessionaire and b) who’s left schlepping the load?

As was the case in professional sports before free agency, the NCAA, its conferences and colleges now control college sports and, in effect, LET PLAYERS PLAY in return for free tuition, room and board. The players are now challenging that.

And given what now looks like a “democratization” wrinkle in monetization – as evidenced in developments, such as the GAMESTOP shorting fandango – the players, if they stand strong, have serious leverage here. And at the very least should garner a seat at the table.

And if most of Congress agrees with Senators Booker and Murphy, the players could wind up ECOMICALLY EMANCIPATED.

FULLY.

ND, as is the case with ALL other universities, has had ZERO PROBLEM with both the monetization and cartelization of higher education in general, in which students who've been saddled with debt are then sent out into a marketplace devoid of adequate opportunities.

So, what will ND's approach be here? Will it willingly concede part of its concessionary prerogative in the name of greater individual economic freedom, or would that threaten the whole structure that promotes ANYTHING BUT economic freedom for the average student?

Equally interesting is the question of how ND and/or other institutions will wish to frame economic emancipation for student athletes – should Congress require it.

Would ND support a system that favors superior athletes – who in many cases are more economically disadvantaged minorities – or one that "redistributes" the proceeds?

In other words, equality of opportunity – with minorities in the usual role of whites; or equality of outcome, with whites in the usual role of minorities. For an institution espousing social justice, that to me looks like CHINESE HANDCUFFS.

Not to mention that neither football nor anything-or-one else in ND-land is supposed to eclipse ND itself or the sanctity of the STUDENT FIRST concept. All of which begins to throw light on how fraught this all is and how the PERFECT could easily become the ENEMY OF THE GOOD either way.

What could happen, THEORETICALLY, is that ND and/or other universities decide they wish to continue doing things THE OLD FASHIONED way, while working out some modified deal with the NCAA that keeps them all in the driver’s seat. That is, assuming whatever law may get passed would allow that.

What will ND ACTUALLY DO? NO IDEA. But if it were me and I didn’t want this sort of change, I’d hire EVERY LAST LOBBIEST I COULD to pull EVERY LAST CONGRESSIONAL STRING WITHIN REACH.

And is that not a Jack Swarbrick type assignment? Or is that something finally ABOVE HIS PAY GRADE?

Sure looking forward to finding out!

I loved the olympics before the professional DREAM TEAM joined up. The DREAM TEAM were already great and had their league to showcase their GREATNESS. No need for them to shatter the dreams of amateurs.
I really only care about the individual olympic sports anyway.

 

[tkirish]

Nothing to apologize about. You've clearly staked out your position, and to me, it looks solid.

You're hunting the NCAA. I'm hunting the fundamental economics of college sports and college in general. You see the NCAA as a shameless plantation. I see academe as the most self-serving, self-sanitizing gravy train in history.

Outside, of course, of the Bolsheviks.

4-4-3 and Savvy, one thing I remember reading was a statement Jack Swarbrick said regarding paying players. He essentially said ND would not participate in that and if they needed to , would set up an alternate conference for schools with like minds. That’s not word for word exact, but I think you get what I am saying.

 

[4-4-3]

I loved the olympics before the professional DREAM TEAM joined up. The DREAM TEAM were already great and had their league to showcase their GREATNESS. No need for them to shatter the dreams of amateurs.
I really only care about the individual olympic sports anyway.

Well, as you probably realize, the decision to go professional was based on the fact that Russian and East German athletes were so heavily trained and subsidized by their communist governments that they indeed enjoyed an advantage over true US amateurs.

And was it not the 72 Olympics in which Russia beat the US team in the basketball finals? That was viewed by Americans as a kind of NATURAL-ORDER TRAVESTY. Then, it took a "MIRACLE" to finally win the gold against the Russians in hockey at Lake Placid in 1980.

Stuff like that wasn't going to fly in what in just a few short months would become Ronald Reagan's America where Russia would be openly viewed as the evil empire and ergo not allowed to go on a) beating US Olympic teams and/or b) winning either the most gold or overall medals or both.

Which is to say it was entirely premised on INTERNATIONAL GEOPOLITICS.

Personally, I didn't mind seeing the US bring in professionals as what the Russians and East Germans were doing was pretty much cheating in that they were using their version of professionals under the existing rules designed solely for amateurs.

Sometimes, I get patriotic. Not always. But sometimes.

 

[4-4-3]

4-4-3 and Savvy, one thing I remember reading was a statement Jack Swarbrick said regarding paying players. He essentially said ND would not participate in that and if they needed to , would set up an alternate conference for schools with like minds. That’s not word for word exact, but I think you get what I am saying.

Bingo!

This is exactly what drew me into this issue. The comment at the AD level that ND would NOT pay its players. It's coming back to me now.

But, of course, that still remains to be seen. And therein lies the drama. This is clearly one of those situations where the RUBBER OF RHETORIC can't help but meet the MONETARY NATURE OF THE ROAD. And that road's reality is that it's HARD.

If the bulk of college football teams were to emancipate their players but ND refused to and set up some kind of alternative conference, what would that do to RECRUITING? How would it not tank if playing for ND kept players from making money they could otherwise make elsewhere?

Now, you're not only having to go to class, take tests and pass finals. You're also not getting paid for the "privilege" while other players are getting paid while in many cases NOT HAVING TO DO ANY OF THAT. Is that not tantamount to injury on top of insult?

I mean, WHERE'S THE MARKETING ANGLE IN THAT?

It could mean the end of ND football as we know it, NO?

Trust me, there's no way, if paying players is legalized, that OSU won't pay its players if Bama does. And if OSU does it, so will Michigan, even though Michigan views itself as a legitimate academic institution.

Ever been to an Ivy League football game? They're not bad games, and it's still football. But then you know in your heart that the outcome SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER.

Neither would ND games if they were taking place in some second-tier "pure amateur" league.

Assuming something like that were to happen.

Yes, stay tuned.

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Well, as you probably realize, the decision to go professional was based on the fact that Russian and East German athletes were so heavily trained and subsidized by their communist governments that they indeed enjoyed an advantage over true US amateurs.

And was it not the 72 Olympics in which Russia beat the US team in the basketball finals? That was viewed by Americans as a kind of NATURAL-ORDER TRAVESTY. Then, it took a "MIRACLE" to finally win the gold against the Russians in hockey at Lake Placid in 1980.

Stuff like that wasn't going to fly in what in just a few short months would become Ronald Reagan's America where Russia would be openly viewed as the evil empire and ergo not allowed to a) go on beating US Olympic teams and/or b) winning either the most gold or overall medals or both.

Which is to say it was entirely premised on INTERNATIONAL GEOPOLITICS.

Personally, I didn't mind seeing the US bring in professionals as what the Russians and East Germans were doing was pretty much cheating in that they were using their version of professionals under the existing rules designed solely for amateurs.

Sometimes, I get patriotic. Not always. But sometimes.

I always thought of America as the sleeping Giant even in the 70's growing up. I thought we were above the Russians and East Germans in that we nobly still used amateurs to battle their juiced up beasts. I remember the Russian refs cheating the USA basketball olympians in the 72 finals. I was proud of America that we were better than the Russians in that we didn't cheat. And we had many boxers achieve greatness fighting the cubans and the Russians propelling their boxing careers. Many other USA amateurs won medals and became stars..
Dave Wottle was my personal favorite. Wearing that visor and running from way behind passing runner after runner.
The true crime was the lack of financial support the American olympic athletes got.
And how sad would that have been if the 1980 U.S.A hockey team won the gold medal with all NHL stars. The Dream team winning 100 to 52 is boring compared to the 50 to 49 victory the USA had in 72. (without the cheating refs). Doug Collins showed great fortitude in coming back from that fragrant foul to calmly sink two free throws. Today he wouldn't be able to continue because he would have been put in concussion protocal.
I am a free market guy but I love amateur sports. Professionals take out the little guy and make him stay at home watching the pros again as his or her dreams are destroyed.https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url...ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIDjuv6Q0O8CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD

 

[savvyandsassier]

Bingo!

This is exactly what drew me into this issue. The comment at the AD level that ND would NOT pay its players. It's coming back to me now.

But, of course, that still remains to be seen. And therein lies the drama. This is clearly one of those situations where the RUBBER OF RHETORIC can't help but meet the MONETARY NATURE OF THE ROAD. And that road's reality is that it's HARD.

If the bulk of college football teams were to emancipate their players but ND refused to and set up some kind of alternative conference, what would that do to RECRUITING? How would it not tank if playing for ND kept players from making money they could otherwise make elsewhere?

Now, you're not only having to go to class, take tests and pass finals. You're also not getting paid for the "privilege" while other players are getting paid while in many cases NOT HAVING TO DO ANY OF THAT. Is that not tantamount to injury on top of insult?

I mean, WHERE'S THE MARKETING ANGLE IN THAT?

It could mean the end of ND football as we know it, NO?

Trust me, there's no way, if paying players is legalized, that OSU won't pay its players if Bama does. And if OSU does it, so will Michigan, even though Michigan views itself as a legitimate academic institution.

Ever been to an Ivy League football game? They're not bad games, and it's still football. But then you know in your heart that the outcome SIMPLY DOESN'T MATTER.

Neither would ND games if they were taking place in some second-tier "pure amateur" league.

Assuming something like that were to happen.

Yes, stay tuned.

Yeah, well, as I said I think that was just talk. And it was disappointing to hear for sure as a ND fan, for them to sort of gratuitously throw in their two cents, that they would never have anything to do with it, and that the plantation system was just fine with them. Even worse they'd be willing to scuttle the sport altogether if their racket was ever under real threat. And that's ND's position on this important, profoundly moral and historic issue in the sport of American football. Even worse when you consider how much ND in particular owes to the sport of football and how incredibly good it's been to them. CFB made ND what it is, and that's how they give back....

I wonder if the great Theo Hesburgh was still around, this renowned progressive Christian, who marched hand in hand with MLK, if ND's position on the matter would be so starkly aligned with the reactionary establishment, who's interest is so... so iniquitously bound up in maintaining this deeply exploitative status quo...

 

[4-4-3]

I always thought of America as the sleeping Giant even in the 70's growing up. I thought we were above the Russians and East Germans in that we nobly still used amateurs to battle their juiced up beasts. I remember the Russian refs cheating the USA basketball olympians in the 72 finals. I was proud of America that we were better than the Russians in that we didn't cheat. And we had many boxers achieve greatness fighting the cubans and the Russians propelling their boxing careers. Many other USA amateurs won medals and became stars..
Dave Wottle was my personal favorite. Wearing that visor and running from way behind passing runner after runner.
The true crime was the lack of financial support the American olympic athletes got.
And how sad would that have been if the 1980 U.S.A hockey team won the gold medal with all NHL stars. The Dream team winning 100 to 52 is boring compared to the 50 to 49 victory the USA had in 72. (without the cheating refs). Doug Collins showed great fortitude in coming back from that fragrant foul to calmly sink two free throws. Today he wouldn't be able to continue because he would have been put in concussion protocal.
I am a free market guy but I love amateur sports. Professionals take out the little guy and make him stay at home watching the pros again as his or her dreams are destroyed.https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhixMwfBL7Y&psig=AOvVaw1LXZX7xv9c0SeDMbd-S1hz&ust=1616922802155000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIDjuv6Q0O8CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD

Well, you're a PURIST, and that's a good thing as there's no substitute for the love of the game -- at least from a supporter's perspective.

But I hardly still follow sports on the individual -- or even team level -- that much. I reflexively root for ND and the Yankees on a more or less DNA basis, and other than the Yankees' young leftfielder, Clint Frazier, I don't follow any individual athlete with much interest. By now, I've just seen too many come and go.

My perspective on sports has become more a trader's view and my interest geared more to the business and SHEER PHENOMENON aspect. I hate to admit it, but I've also become something of a de-constructionist. And at the moment, there's plenty to deconstruct, including, as I see it, major SEA CHANGES ahead.

And MANY OF THEM have to do with money and the generation of ever more novel sports-associated income streams. For as long, that is, as that's possible. Because just as AGE DIMINISHES NOVELTY (my issue), BAD MONEY EVENTUALLY DRIVES OUT GOOD MONEY. As it's too much money on the back of money. Also known as DEBT.

So, the players -- particularly in this heightened SOCIAL JUSTICE/EQUITY CLIMATE -- want IN while the money machine is still going FULL TILT and the money produced, STILL GOOD and, if they're smart, CAN THEN BE INVESTED in INFLATION-IMMUNE or even INFLATION-BENEFICIAL assets. Deflation is definitely coming, but my guess is that SERIOUS INFLATION strikes first.

And all of this against the background of a university system which is now CLEARLY OPERATING on the basis of UNSUSTAINABLE ECONOMICS. I mean, where are the average-Joe income streams that will pay down 6-figure college debt?

Fortunately, for scholarship athletes, that's not their problem, yet it's obvious they want even FURTHER INSULATION from anything even remotely that monetarily dangerous.

They want ONE-PERCENT-VILLE.

Who can blame them?

 

[4-4-3]

Yeah, well, as I said I think that was just talk. And it was disappointing to hear for sure as a ND fan, for them to sort of gratuitously throw in their two cents, that they would never have anything to do with it, and that the plantation system was just fine with them. Even worse they'd be willing to scuttle the sport altogether if their racket was ever under real threat. And that's ND's position on this important, profoundly moral and historic issue in the sport of American football. Even worse when you consider how much ND in particular owes to the sport of football and how incredibly good it's been to them. CFB made ND what it is, and that's how they give back....

I wonder if the great Theo Hesburgh was still around, this renowned progressive Christian, who marched hand in hand with MLK, if ND's position on the matter would be so starkly aligned with the reactionary establishment, who's interest is so... so iniquitously bound up in maintaining this deeply exploitative status quo...

Well put. But your argument can be flipped on its back.

As I see it, the situation is like one of those M.C. Escher paintings where the stairs appear to be going up and down at the same time.

For brevity’s sake, I won’t restate your argument.

But the reverse “morally grounded” argument states that by not going along with the outright professionalization of college sports, ND is adhering to something other than a strictly capitalistic standard and is thereby not allowing either the sport OR IT to fall prey to wholesale monetization.

And in so doing, ND is remaining true to its exclusive mission as an institution of higher learning rather than becoming as well a professional sports franchise.

Please understand that I’M NOT MAKING THIS ARGUMENT. I’m merely pointing out that to many, it may sound not only PLAUSIBLE but PERSUASIVE.

What’s dramatic here is that ND has been on this collision course WITH ITSELF since Leahy left. And it was almost inevitable that AT SOME POINT it would come down to this kind of either

• RUBICON where ND ditches custom and crosses back into Roman territory with provincial legions, i.e. backs down on its historic educational mission; or
• OPERATION BARBAROSSA where ND opens up a second front to its educational mission – via a “values proposition” extension – in hopes of preserving the “purity” and “integrity” of amateur sports within the university context.

Who knows what ND will actually do? But that it will be forced to make A CHOICE seems – at least to me – SELF-EVIDENT.

As I previously mentioned, ND is wearing some pretty tight CHINESE HANDCUFFS.

Will it find a way out of them or not?

 

[BodiTheGreat]

I was trying

Well, you're a PURIST, and that's a good thing as there's no substitute for the love of the game -- at least from a supporter's perspective.

But I hardly still follow sports on the individual -- or even team level -- that much. I reflexively root for ND and the Yankees on a more or less DNA basis, and other than the Yankees' young leftfielder, Clint Frazier, I don't follow any individual athlete with much interest. By now, I've just seen too many come and go.

My perspective on sports has become more a trader's view and my interest geared more to the business and SHEER PHENOMENON aspect. I hate to admit it, but I've also become something of a de-constructionist. And at the moment, there's plenty to deconstruct, including, as I see it, major SEA CHANGES ahead.

And MANY OF THEM have to do with money and the generation of ever more novel sports-associated income streams. For as long, that is, as that's possible. Because just as AGE DIMINISHES NOVELTY (my issue), BAD MONEY EVENTUALLY DRIVES OUT GOOD MONEY. As it's too much money on the back of money. Also known as DEBT.

So, the players -- particularly in this heightened SOCIAL JUSTICE/EQUITY CLIMATE -- want IN while the money machine is still going FULL TILT and the money produced, STILL GOOD and, if they're smart, CAN THEN BE INVESTED in INFLATION-IMMUNE or even INFLATION-BENEFICIAL assets. Deflation is definitely coming, but my guess is that SERIOUS INFLATION strikes first.

And all of this against the background of a university system which is now CLEARLY OPERATING on the basis of UNSUSTAINABLE ECONOMICS. I mean, where are the average-Joe income streams that will pay down 6-figure college debt?

Fortunately, for scholarship athletes, that's not their problem, yet it's obvious they want even FURTHER INSULATION from anything even remotely that monetarily dangerous.

They want ONE-PERCENT-VILLE.

Who can blame them?

I am a Yankee fan too. Reggie Jackson hitting those three home runs against the Dodgers in the 78 world series. I skipped football practice to see the Bucky Dent homerun at Fenway on tv!

 

[tkirish]

I don’t want get into thr politics of this. When this happens ( looks like it will) the ND administration is going have to make a decision. I realize their emphasis is on education. To them, it’s always first. However, the money ND foo generates for the university cannot be stated enough. If they opt out of the “ payment for players” , ND football will be done as we know it. I have no idea how they decide to go. I do think there is way to allow the players payment while still maintaining academic integrity. If I had to bet which way they go, I think they side with allowing players to be paid. They have upgraded facilities and the stadium over the years. You wouldn’t do that unless you were serious about your athletic program. That’s just my gut feeling nothing more .

 

[4-4-3]

I was trying


I am a Yankee fan too. Reggie Jackson hitting those three home runs against the Dodgers in the 78 world series. I skipped football practice to see the Bucky Dent homerun at Fenway on tv!

Good decision.

I was "released" early from football practice on Thanksgiving Day so that I could go to Yankee Stadium to see ND lose to Syracuse 14-7. It was 1963 and two weeks after Kennedy was shot. It was also the last ND game of the 60's NOT coached by Ara Parseghian, who for many of us became Kennedy's successor as a role model.

As for the Yankees, I saw Mickey Mantle plant one in the upper deck in right field in 58 against the Red Sox on Old Timers Day. I was also there the night in 76 Chambliss won the pennant with the walk-off homer against the Royals. I was in a box behind the Royals dugout and had a perfect shot of him leaning into the pitch.

Old, old Yankee Stadium and Old Yankee Stadium. Loved them both.

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Good decision.

I was "released" early from football practice on Thanksgiving Day so that I could go to Yankee Stadium to see ND lose to Syracuse 14-7. It was 1963 and two weeks after Kennedy was shot. It was also the last ND game of the 60's NOT coached by Ara Parseghian, who for many of us became Kennedy's successor as a role model.

As for the Yankees, I saw Mickey Mantle plant one in the upper deck in right field in 58 against the Red Sox on Old Timers Day. I was also there the night in 76 Chambliss won the pennant with the walk-off homer against the Royals. I was in a box behind the Royals dugout and had a perfect shot of him leaning into the pitch.

Old, old Yankee Stadium and Old Yankee Stadium. Loved them both.

My Dad took me to one Yankee game. And that was the year the Yankees played at Shea ! Damn !

 

[4-4-3]

I don’t want get into thr politics of this. When this happens ( looks like it will) the ND administration is going have to make a decision. I realize their emphasis is on education. To them, it’s always first. However, the money ND foo generates for the university cannot be stated enough. If they opt out of the “ payment for players” , ND football will be done as we know it. I have no idea how they decide to go. I do think there is way to allow the players payment while still maintaining academic integrity. If I had to bet which way they go, I think they side with allowing players to be paid. They have upgraded facilities and the stadium over the years. You wouldn’t do that unless you were serious about your athletic program. That’s just my gut feeling nothing more .

Yes, no sense in veering into politics per se as the thread will be suspended.

And, yes, it's hard to say what ND will do.

I don't usually like to speculate but if it were me, my first gambit -- should trying to kill the idea in the crib fail -- would be to somehow cut the baby in two. Not pay the players outright, yet provide them with something of commensurate value. Though I have no idea of what that might be.

Then there's the question of what the NCAA will try to do as a counter-measure. It could be something viable or not, but there's no knowing whether ND would go along with whatever the NCAA might come up with either.

But then, ALL OF THAT COULD BE MOOT as Congress could simply say THIS IS HOW IT GOES NOW. Anyone not interested can take their ball and go home.

But in following the money, I think your instinct is sound. Money is certainly going to move the needle for everyone else. And whether ND likes it or not, it's still a commercial world more so than a values-driven one. So, if ND wishes to keep making money off of football, it will need to follow the money itself.

Otherwise, it's likely game over.

 

[4-4-3]

My Dad took me to one Yankee game. And that was the year the Yankees played at Shea ! Damn !

Very tough break for you.

Bobby Murcer hit 10 home runs playing at Shea. Pretty much halted his Yankee career in his prime.

He did come back for a cameo, but curtain calls are never quite the same.

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Very tough break for you.

Bobby Murcer hit 10 home runs playing at Shea. Pretty much halted his Yankee career in his prime.

He did come back for a cameo, but curtain calls are never quite the same.

I was a big fan of Ron Bloomberg and Celerino Sanchez the third baseman. Phil Rizzuto hyped them up big time when they first started.
I started watching the Yankees when Jerry Kenney, Roy White, Danny Cater, Gene Michael, Curt Blafery, Fritz Petersen/Mike Kecich, Horace Clark, Bobby Murcer, Ron Woods, Sparky Lisle, Stan Bahnsen, Thurman Munson----They sucked but that made 76,77, and 78 that much sweeter.
You always remember the players you first watched as a kid.
Oh I forgot Stottlemeyer their best pitcher.

 

[4-4-3]

I was a big fan of Ron Bloomberg and Celerino Sanchez the third baseman. Phil Rizzuto hyped them up big time when they first started.
I started watching the Yankees when Jerry Kenney, Roy White, Danny Cater, Gene Michael, Curt Blafery, Fritz Petersen/Mike Kecich, Horace Clark, Bobby Murcer, Ron Woods, Sparky Lisle, Stan Bahnsen, Thurman Munson----They sucked but that made 76,77, and 78 that much sweeter.
You always remember the players you first watched as a kid.
Oh I forgot Stottlemeyer their best pitcher.

Those were extremely undermanned Yankee teams. Murcer, Munson and White were good. The pitchers were surprisingly good. All pretty low ERA's. But there were seldom years where they were all good at the same time. Lyle was EXCELLENT, and they got him for Danny Cater, I believe. Highway robbery as Cater was finished.

But Bloomberg faded, Sanchez was a bust, Blefary was washed up before he arrived, while Clarke, Michael and the rest of them were barely average. Rich McKinney, Jerry Kenny, Rusty Torres, Charlie Sikes. No juice, really.

Free agency is what saved the Yankees. That and Steinbrenner's obnoxiousness and CHECKBOOK. The moment Catfish Hunter arrived it was a NEW BALL GAME. I was just getting settled in New York around then, and you could really feel the difference.

As happened with Lyle, Boston was always trading, selling or losing great players to the Yankees:

Sad Sam Jones, Bullet Joe Bush, Babe Ruth, Red Ruffing, Lyle, Wade Boggs, Johnny Damon and Roger Clemens by way of Toronto. There may have been one or two others as well. But NEARLY ALL OF THOSE GUYS I just mentioned won World Series AFTER coming to the Yankees during a period when Boston won ZERO.

The only exception being Damon, I believe, who was at Boston when they broke the drought in 2004.

Nonetheless, a remarkable stat.

As for the championship Yankee teams of the late 70's, they were built pretty much brick by brick by Gabe Paul who Steinbrenner knew from Cleveland. Nettles, Piniella, Chambliss, Randolph, Rivers, Gullet, Dent, Gamble, Tidrow, Holtzman, Gossage, Johnson. Those were all terrific acquisitions of already established players or ones with obvious potential.

It took 4 to 5 years to build that team, but they got there.

 

[BodiTheGreat]

Those were extremely undermanned Yankee teams. Murcer, Munson and White were good. The pitchers were surprisingly good. All pretty low ERA's. But there were seldom years where they were all good at the same time. Lyle was EXCELLENT, and they got him for Danny Cater, I believe. Highway robbery as Cater was finished.

But Bloomberg faded, Sanchez was a bust, Blefary was washed up before he arrived, while Clarke, Michael and the rest of them were barely average. Rich McKinney, Jerry Kenny, Rusty Torres, Charlie Sikes. No juice, really.

Free agency is what saved the Yankees. That and Steinbrenner's obnoxiousness and CHECKBOOK. The moment Catfish Hunter arrived it was a NEW BALL GAME. I was just getting settled in New York around then, and you could really feel the difference.

As happened with Lyle, Boston was always trading, selling or losing great players to the Yankees:

Sad Sam Jones, Bullet Joe Bush, Babe Ruth, Red Ruffing, Lyle, Wade Boggs, Johnny Damon and Roger Clemens by way of Toronto. There may have been one or two others as well. But NEARLY ALL OF THOSE GUYS I just mentioned won World Series AFTER coming to the Yankees during a period when Boston won ZERO.

The only exception being Damon, I believe, who was at Boston when they broke the drought in 2004.

Nonetheless, a remarkable stat.

As for the championship Yankee teams of the late 70's, they were built pretty much brick by brick by Gabe Paul who Steinbrenner knew from Cleveland. Nettles, Piniella, Chambliss, Randolph, Rivers, Gullet, Dent, Gamble, Tidrow, Holtzman, Gossage, Johnson. Those were all terrific acquisitions of already established players or ones with obvious potential.

It took 4 to 5 years to build that team, but they got there.

Don't forget about Billy Martin. Liked his fire ! And Don Lemon who was the original Joe Torre.
I still remember when the Yankees were playing on the game of the week on a Saturday afternoon when Billy called Reggie in from the outfield for not hustling enough for Billy. That was crazy.
And when Billy asked the ump to check the pine tar on George Bretts bat after his big time homerun. George went balistic !
I lived about ten miles or so from where Billy died in the car wreck. Very sad.

 

[Drinking The Green Koolaid]

Ever hear the Billy Martin cow story? I first heard Bob Costas tell the story on radio shortly after Billy passed, when they were doing a remembrance piece on Billy. Mickey Mantle was the other character in the story. It was classic Billy Martin stuff.

Here is the Mick telling the story himself:



The story sounded a little funnier when Costas retold it, but as the saying goes, you can't make this stuff up.

 

[shabak]

Okay party people, it's time to get serious about the biggest, most earth-shattering, cataclysmic change on the CFB scene, of course I mean the so-called NIL business, the acronym referring to name, image, likeness, which we all know means that players, when the new legislation is finalized, are now free to get paid, and cannot be blacklisted and expelled by the evil NCAA the way they have been up until now. This new regime of course does not mean that ND or any school has to share their winnings with the players like in the NFL or any other professional league, but merely that they can no longer enforce some brutish involuntary amateurism on the players under pain of permanent ineligibility.

This is a touchy subject, because it brings out a real ugly side in a lot of sports fans, and quite frankly it's that ugliness that has allowed the NCAA to get away with being such a vicious outfit like they are for as long as they have. And naturally, the NCAA wants no part of this new state of affairs, and is doing everything they can to prevent it, and forestall and drag their feet. And so state governments, and possibly the feds have to step in and make shit happen where the NCAA is far too corrupt and depraved to ever willingly to do it themselves.

And so with that little intro out of the way, let's talk about this shit! And so the way it breaks down pretty much as a practical matter is that it legalizes boosters paying players, which you could imagine in the form of signing autographs at a local car dealership or some cheesy scenario like that. And that is my understanding. Nothing too sophisticated, but nevertheless a huge change. I don't know if they will attempt to put a cap on what players can earn, or if you're only allowed to collect some market rate for a signed photo, or what some or all of the key details will look like. But that's the basic upshot it. It legalizes heretofore under the table payments. We don't even need to talk about 'gaming the system' or something like that, because presumably that is the whole point, and the direct intent and obvious consequence of the legislation on its face.

So I'm going to get out of the way, but one final thought, and it should be the elephant in the room on this subject for ND fans. ND is known as squeaky clean, and we don't pay our players and we definitely do not condone any sort of 'boosters' paying our players. We are legitimately clean, and that is certainly our 'brand' and presumably our reality. I don't know how completely true that actually is, but I've always felt it to be more or less correct, and incidents like with Kim Dunbar are wild exceptions to the otherwise dependable rule. And that's about to change forever. Now we won't be cheating, naturally, on account of these watershed new rules changes. But we better get used to the idea, institutionally, and get our balls in gear, because if we don't, and the old cultural default of defining ourselves by our status as one of the good guys, and the city on the hill that doesn't sully itself with such activities, could sink our recruiting and the program itself conceivably overnight. Or at least it's fair to say that things will happen quickly once the new rules are in place. But this can be a massive boon for ND as well. This can level the playing field for us. It could sink our recruiting if we're not ready, but if we are ready our recruiting might very well soar.

So please everyone share their thoughts. Obviously coronavirus has dominated sports and sports coverage, and this huge looming change in the sport of CFB has been underreported. But it's here, and it's time to get ourselves up to speed on it in a big way. And it's a good thing to chew the cud over in the offseason.

TLTR

 

[savvyandsassier]

TLTR

It's kind of a long and involved subject, so maybe it's better you didn't bother with it. We don't need everyone's opinion quite frankly.

 

[4-4-3]

Don't forget about Billy Martin. Liked his fire ! And Don Lemon who was the original Joe Torre.
I still remember when the Yankees were playing on the game of the week on a Saturday afternoon when Billy called Reggie in from the outfield for not hustling enough for Billy. That was crazy.
And when Billy asked the ump to check the pine tar on George Bretts bat after his big time homerun. George went balistic !
I lived about ten miles or so from where Billy died in the car wreck. Very sad.

Billy Martin was my dad's second-favorite Yankee in the 50's, Mantle, of course, being number one.

My dad -- who with pros and semi-pros had played (third base) on the 8th Air Force team in England during WW II and had appeared in photos and newsreels as a kid with Babe Ruth -- was at the same time very religious.

On my first trip to Yankee Stadium in 1956, he bought me a packet of photos of Yankee players. I remember us looking at those photos and him pointing out to me how Billy Martin's cap had a small cross embroidered on it just above the Yankee logo. Very small, but you could see it. This was also at a time when ND helmets had crosses on them.

Anyway, I knew what my father meant by pointing out the cross on Martin's cap, yet SAYING NOTHING. He was speaking in CODE. No matter what else they say about this guy, HE'S A GOOD MAN. I'd seen my dad in a couple of bar fights, so I instinctively connected the dots. The "good" have quick fists.

And, yeah, I remember the day Billy died. Quite a shock. I was in a pub on Third Avenue eating at the bar, and someone handed me the Daily News.

One thing about Billy, though. If he didn't like you, YOU WERE TOAST. He hated Ken Holtzman, didn't like Reggie much -- I also watched the Boston incident on TV -- and the reason the George Brett thing got so out of hand is that Billy hated BRETT'S BROTHER, Ken, who'd gotten hurt in a brief stint with the Yankees, but who Billy had felt had been DOGGING IT.

And with Billy Martin, you NEVER dogged it. Cross or no cross.

 

[shabak]

What CFB needs is a 14th amendment, so to speak, because the piece of human garbage plantation owners that run the sport are never going to voluntarily relinquish the key legal driver of their exploitation racket. That being essentially one thing, that laughable joke and crude weapon of 'amateurism' that they insist athletes formally agree and sign on the dotted line to when they accept scholarships.

And it was the destruction of that little clause in the scholarship paperwork that I thought was indeed going to be effectively destroyed by way of the original California legislation, and effectively that was the point of it, though I'm not intimately familiar with the specifics of that legislation, but I thought that was the idea.

And the NCAA's response to that threat, genuinely evil institution that it is, is by coming up with their own version which attempts to forestall that by insisting that whatever is decided upon and deigned to be allowed to exist unmolested by the NCAA'S slave police, that 'amateurism' - as they define it and impose it- which is what modern-day sports slavery is, remains untouched. So none of this means shit until phony baloney amateurism is forcibly swept away once and for all.

And that's what the hold up is. As always the NCAA doesn't care about the sport, the players, the fans, nothing.... only its own legal prerogatives and abilities to openly exploit athletes and dominate the proceedings. So this ain't going anywhere until so-called amateurism is destroyed. And then naturally anybody can pay any player what they want, which is what the NCAA - a true force of downright evil in society - is dead set on opposing. Because that's their and has always been their only effective mission: to forcibly impoverish athletes and enrich themselves and member institutions. They are indeed the plantation, and athletes the slaves.

I want our vacated wins back