#1 NBA pick Ben Simmons rips the NCAA and the 'one and done' system

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990

... In a new documentary that will air at 9 p.m. ET on Friday on Showtime, Philadelphia 76ers rookie and No. 1 pick in the 2016 draft Ben Simmons rips the NCAA for what he feels is exploitation of him in preventing him from being paid for his play at LSU ...

Ben apparently ****ed up. He should have just become the number 1 pick straight out of high school.

On the other hand, if that wouldn't have happened without him playing at LSU, **** Ben and his one-year-of-college-education opinion.

Personally, I think colleges should pay these guys. Also personally, I don't give a shit what any 20-year-old has to say about anything except possibly music.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

Ben apparently ****ed up. He should have just become the number 1 pick straight out of high school.

On the other hand, if that wouldn't have happened without him playing at LSU, **** Ben and his one-year-of-college-education opinion.

Personally, I think colleges should pay these guys. Also personally, I don't give a shit what any 20-year-old has to say about anything except possibly music.

Colleges and the NCAA shouldn't have to pay a player anything. The athlete goes in KNOWING they will NOT get paid. They know this. It's been this way for eons. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to college. They can go play euro ball and MAKE money if they want. That is up to them. None of this is the NCAA's fault. The only thing I believe that these kids should be allowed to do is profit of of their likeness when they are in college OUTSIDE of classes and practice. If they want to get paid to appear on Around the Horn, they should be able to. If they wish to sign endorsement deals, they should be able to. If they want to be paid for an appearance or to sign autographs, they should be able to. But the NCAA and school owe the student athlete nothing beyond an athletic scholarship and STIPEND that many get above and beyond room and board already.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Colleges and the NCAA shouldn't have to pay a player anything. The athlete goes in KNOWING they will NOT get paid. They know this. It's been this way for eons. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to college. They can go play euro ball and MAKE money if they want. That is up to them. None of this is the NCAA's fault. The only thing I believe that these kids should be allowed to do is profit of of their likeness when they are in college OUTSIDE of classes and practice. If they want to get paid to appear on Around the Horn, they should be able to. If they wish to sign endorsement deals, they should be able to. If they want to be paid for an appearance or to sign autographs, they should be able to. But the NCAA and school owe the student athlete nothing beyond an athletic scholarship and STIPEND that many get above and beyond room and board already.

True, no one is forcing the kids to go to college and I certainly wouldn't want to force the schools to pay their players.

What I would like is for schools to be allowed to pay their players if they choose to do so. Soon enough, they'd all be doing it or their cash cows would quickly dry up and give no more free milk.

The vast majority of college players won't make a dime at the pro level unless they become ushers.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

True, no one is forcing the kids to go to college and I certainly wouldn't want to force the schools to pay their players.

What I would like is for schools to be allowed to pay their players if they choose to do so. Soon enough, they'd all be doing it or their cash cows would quickly dry up and give no more free milk.

That I suppose is the option of a school or the NCAA, but if that is the case, they sure as hell better make a division solely for these types of schools, which would be a very few. Many basketball programs, even some D1 bball programs, do not make money directly.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by BWillie

That I suppose is the option of a school or the NCAA, but if that is the case, they sure as hell better make a division solely for these types of schools, which would be a very few. Many basketball programs, even some D1 bball programs, do not make money directly.

It's certainly not an option currently.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ClevelandBronco

True, no one is forcing the kids to go to college and I certainly wouldn't want to force the schools to pay their players.

What I would like is for schools to be allowed to pay their players if they choose to do so. Soon enough, they'd all be doing it or their cash cows would quickly dry up and give no more free milk.

The vast majority of college players won't make a dime at the pro level unless they become ushers.

The problem is that people want to bomb college athletics so address the 2% of NCAA athletes that are actually any kind of profit drivers on their own.

First you have all the non-revenue sports; essentially everything other than football and basketball. Nothing else is profitable for the schools. So right there 9 of 10 NCAA athletes are coming out ahead by getting school paid for.

For the vast VAST majority of athletes in revenue sports, the scholarship model is completely equitable because they're fungible. Even a great OL isn't drawing attendance to the school. Evan Boehm was probably the highest profile, most successful OL recruit in Mizzou history and I'd venture that his time at Mizzou sold precisely zero tickets. The people that went to those games didn't go to them because he was there.

So what are you talking about? A handful of elite skill position players at middle tier schools. Alabama's selling out regardless of any single player. The 'traditional' football powers are going to get people to watch their games regardless of any single player that plays there. The only time an individual makes a difference is someone like Daniel at Mizzou; a guy that really made the program go from a relative also-ran to a legitimate draw.

And you say you don't want to force teams to pay their players but by allowing some schools to do so, you're essentially forcing ALL schools to do so unless you want to create an obvious have/have not situation.

Finally, Title IX makes this possibility an absolute disaster. Remember that schools have to funnel a great deal of the revenue generated by those big money sports to womens athletics that generate no money at all. The closer you get to break even for revenue sports, the more damage you do to every women's sport that is required to be funded and every non-revenue men's sport that may end up on the chopping block to find the $$$ to pay for those women's sports.

Paying players is just a really bad idea and by and large works to the benefit of very few individuals at the massive detriment of a great deal more of them. It's solving a problem that doesn't actually exist, IMO. Or at the very least is wildly overblown. As has already been said - if this relationship wasn't mutually beneficial, kids wouldn't still be playing. If nothing else, the exposure and coaching they get sets them up to make far more at the next level.

[ClevelandBronco]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

And you say you don't want to force teams to pay their players but by allowing some schools to do so, you're essentially forcing ALL schools to do so unless you want to create an obvious have/have not situation.

Correct. I said as much.

And take a guess how I view non-revenue producing sports and Title IX. I don't want to see those things damaged. I'd like to see them destroyed.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by BWillie

Colleges and the NCAA shouldn't have to pay a player anything. The athlete goes in KNOWING they will NOT get paid. They know this. It's been this way for eons. Nobody is forcing anyone to go to college. They can go play euro ball and MAKE money if they want. That is up to them. None of this is the NCAA's fault. The only thing I believe that these kids should be allowed to do is profit of of their likeness when they are in college OUTSIDE of classes and practice. If they want to get paid to appear on Around the Horn, they should be able to. If they wish to sign endorsement deals, they should be able to. If they want to be paid for an appearance or to sign autographs, they should be able to. But the NCAA and school owe the student athlete nothing beyond an athletic scholarship and STIPEND that many get above and beyond room and board already.

If an institution is literally making BILLIONS of you, you should be paid. And going out of the country to play ball is an option but let's not act like forcing an 18 year old kid to leave the country just to earn money is a great idea.

These guys can't even get side jobs to earn money. How the **** is that fair?
Posted via Mobile Device

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by -King-

If an institution is literally making BILLIONS of you, you should be paid. And going out of the country to play ball is an option but let's not act like forcing an 18 year old kid to leave the country just to earn money is a great idea.

These guys can't even get side jobs to earn money. How the **** is that fair?
Posted via Mobile Device

Because the moment you open that door, they'll get non-appearance jobs that pay them for nothing and are impossible to monitor/enforce. The NCAA could never even begin to police the wild wild west that would occur the moment they told kids to just go get jobs. Every booster with a small business in the country would suddenly find a 'job' for any 4 star or better recruit that just so happens to attend his/her alma mater.

You can't blame the NCAA for the fact that opening this door even a crack would lead to rampant cheating. As it is schools are giving jobs to parents, uncles and friends to encourage kids to attend. They let Cam Newton off the hook because his dad insisted that he took the benefits on not Cam. They have enough shit to sift through now that if they made it even a little easier, it would blow the doors off any impression of an even playing field in college athletics.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Because the moment you open that door, they'll get non-appearance jobs that pay them for nothing and are impossible to monitor/enforce. The NCAA could never even begin to police the wild wild west that would occur the moment they told kids to just go get jobs. Every booster with a small business in the country would suddenly find a 'job' for any 4 star or better recruit that just so happens to attend his/her alma mater.

You can't blame the NCAA for the fact that opening this door even a crack would lead to rampant cheating. As it is schools are giving jobs to parents, uncles and friends to encourage kids to attend. They let Cam Newton off the hook because his dad insisted that he took the benefits on not Cam. They have enough shit to sift through now that if they made it even a little easier, it would blow the doors off any impression of an even playing field in college athletics.

So what if they do that? Who the hell cares? That same booster can get a kid who plays clarinet on a band scholarship to do the same thing and that's perfectly fine but it's not ok when it's a football or basketball player?

If someone wants to pay Reggie Bush's mom's mortgage, who cares? If that's not ethically right for players, then it shouldn't be okay for any scholarship student in the school. If you're on a scholarship, you shouldn't be allowed to have a job all around. Either you let them all have the same rights or none of them have the same rights.
Posted via Mobile Device

[vailpass]

Originally Posted by -King-

If an institution is literally making BILLIONS of you, you should be paid. And going out of the country to play ball is an option but let's not act like forcing an 18 year old kid to leave the country just to earn money is a great idea.

These guys can't even get side jobs to earn money. How the **** is that fair?
Posted via Mobile Device

Nobody is forcing them to enroll in college where they have a ready-made showcase to market themselves for multi-million dollar contracts.
Don't like it? Don't sign up.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by -King-

If an institution is literally making BILLIONS of you, you should be paid. And going out of the country to play ball is an option but let's not act like forcing an 18 year old kid to leave the country just to earn money is a great idea.

These guys can't even get side jobs to earn money. How the **** is that fair?
Posted via Mobile Device

The guys on Kansas bball team get about a 5k stipend in addition to room and board. The get to live in a 200M "dorm" just for basketball players.

Plus, Simmons left his country to come to the US to play bball. By far and large most D1 athletes are over compensated w/ their scholarship & room board based on any revenue or lack thereof they bring to the school.

[sedated]

Originally Posted by BWillie

The guys on Kansas bball team get about a 5k stipend in addition to room and board. The get to live in a 200M "dorm" just for basketball players.

Fact check:

The dorm houses the basketball team (16 people) and 17 non-athletes. Also, it cost $12 million, not $200 million.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by BWillie

The guys on Kansas bball team get about a 5k stipend in addition to room and board. The get to live in a 200M "dorm" just for basketball players.

Plus, Simmons left his country to come to the US to play bball. By far and large most D1 athletes are over compensated w/ their scholarship & room board based on any revenue or lack thereof they bring to the school.

None of what you said is true. I'm guessing Kansas is like Mizzou in that the athletes dorms allow non athletes as well. And it's not even close to 200M.

Also yes they receive stipends. So does any other student who travels for the school. The scholarship band kids receive stipends too. Yet they still have way more privileges than the football players. There's nothing wrong if Bill Gates pays one of them a million dollars for a personal concert, but there's something wrong with a football player getting cash from a dealership to basically be a advertisement for them? How is that fair?

If your sport makes billions of dollars, you should be compensated for it.
Posted via Mobile Device