08-14-2020, 12:03 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-14-2020, 12:23 PM by cardcrimson.)
(08-14-2020, 06:39 AM)lex24 Wrote:(08-14-2020, 02:14 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: teejers1 - I’m not equating these things as equally wrong, just to draw parallels...
You would have heard slave owners who justified slavery because they treated their slaves well, and if they were somewhere else those slaves would have been worse off. This is the same exact mentality that claims NCAA athletes have it great right now and misses the point of giving college athletes rights they don’t currently have. It’s about more than money.
Like slaves, NCAA athletes have no agency or say in the conditions under which they must labor. Moreover, assuming all is well is based on accepting the surrounding society’s practices as the way it is, was, and always will be. The reality is the world is what we and those who fight to change it want it to be.
I understand the visceral need to hold on to a way of life with which you identify or rely on in some way, but the world is always changing for better or worse. It’s a constant battle for rights and resources. There are really no right or wrong answers about what they are and how they are distributed, just what the market wants and is willing to pay for it. In this case, there is now a market for the idea college athletes deserve to have more rights.
The Booker proposal seems to be giving rights and agency to them as a first step, so they have more freedom and a framework with which to seek improvements to the conditions under which they labor for schools. Just this step is a very large move and may placate athletes seeking to be paid by schools, in large measure because these new rights would allow them to capitalize on their value instead of signing away the rights to capitalize on it to schools. Will probably also allow athletes on scholarship to hold jobs and get paid too, something now prohibited.
Prior to this year I would have thought a Bill of Rights for athletes that provides rights to exploit the free market would be a bedrock conservative principle and such a bill would sail through Congress like shit through a Goose. But today, with the GOP apparently working to take voting rights from every American and cashiering every value it ever claimed, I have no idea what the prospects are for such a bill gaining bi-partisan support. I fear former slave states with GOP MOCs will make this into a partisan issue - to keep mostly Black athletes from gaining more rights in favor of white power structure - not a human rights one. I hope I’m wrong and this reform sails through Congress and into law.
Any attempt to draw “parallels” between slavery and the NCAA borders on pornographic. Simply put no one is forcing anyone to play a sport. They “must” not “labor”. They choose to play. It’s dramatic , of course, as is the “exploitation” label.
I’ve never been a fan of the NCAA as an organization. And some changes should more forward - extended health Care, name and likeness compensation, make it easier to transfer (although it should be no easier than any other students ability to transfer) and I like the idea of a Pct of profits going to educationally related charities - although political make that messy.
The NFL can have a D league. Although I’m not sure that would be a better option for a kid - at least it provides a choice.
I’d respond to your nonsense relating to the GOP but I don’t want to violate the Terry Rule. Even though you just did.
And they choose where they want to play, assuming a kid gets more than one offer. The relation to slavery has to be one of the dumber comments I've heard in a long time. Only to be surpassed by the comment that the White GOP are trying to keep the Black athlete down. Simply stunning.
(08-13-2020, 05:56 PM)teejers1 Wrote:(08-13-2020, 03:53 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: College sports is going to be unrecognizable to what it is today within a couple years. The pace of change relative to what has been until now, is going to be breathtaking.
If by breathtaking, you mean "a lot fewer schools and teams competing," then I agree.
If by breathtaking, you mean players will be paid (beyond the comp they already get), then I hope you are wrong. That would be death knell for Stanford in upper echelon of sports competition.
Breathtaking meaning that varsity sports besides football and perhaps women's and men's basketball will be taking their last breaths very soon.
Free Phogge!!!! And no, crimson doesn't refer to the Tide.
