Recent Comments

God I hope we line this guy up in the backfield a lot. Hammer!

Or we'll have two posts.

So he knows Bowen and Moore just like the rest, fits right in

Wire to wire FAM!

I would have been valedictorian if 87.5% got me A+'s

MULTI-BASKET VICTORY, FAM!

ARE WE ALLOWED TO DO THAT?

Yeah sounds like they committed a bit more per sport in support of the Commonwealth Clash but did away with the ACC home game giveaways.

Apparently that was only the loluva game. No bacon then. Since 2 games with 2 back to back misses, but no bacon. Smithfield must have backed down their support.

Still throwing out bacon pants. But I want to eat my bacon, not wear it.

I didn't watch, you all are welcome!

Bedford has grown on me. He was so inconsistent early in the season, but now it seems like he's all over the court and really contributing.
As for Neo, I'm seeing the upside of what he can do, but he just can't put it all together yet. No way he seems to me to be an NBA pick now, but he is just a freshman and only 19 years old playing in a foreign country with a lot of expectation on his shoulders. We'll see.

, nobody tries to cap the rest of the system; no one has attempted to limit coaching salaries, no one has attempted to limit television, revenues, and if anyone has, they have fallen victim to the collective action problem

Sure, but a couple things. No one has tried to cap TV Revenue because that is what makes this whole machine run. Without the TV Rev, the players, the coaches, and everyone else is left holding an empty bag.

But more to the point...has paying the players:
-Reduced Coaching Salaries?
-Reduced Universities buliding opulent Athletic facilities or stadium Reno projects?
-Changed the TV Networks behavior (i.e. more ads, less game)?

The answer to all those questions is no. So this idea that Players are somehow "getting their share" IMHO is a fallacy. Because Coaches aren't making less, schools aren't (at least not at the P4 level), and TV Networks sure as hell aren't.

So where is the money coming from? (beyond the Rev-Share) Well, truth is we don't really know, probably a good chunk from large individual donors, but at some point that money is going to get exhausted as donors lose interest or get bored and want to move onto the next thing. So that leaves a couple options: pay players less or extract more money from the non-Athlete population---I have a pretty good idea how that is going to play out.

So no, I don't have any problem telling these Athletes (99.8% who aren't good enough to play professionally) that they are expected to maintain academic standards, abide by contracts, or occasionally display altruistic behavior. That's the Real World for all of us who can't run a 4.4, throw a 96 MPH fastball, or make 25 footer with a hand in our face. That's the same Real World that that nearly all of them will be entering once their 5, 6, 7, or 9 years of eligibility as a "Collegiate Athlete," are expended.

I have no problem with Athletes capitalizing on their own individual marketability, I do have a problem with treating them like they are Superhumans that deserve to have zero accountability to anything other than finding the biggest bag.