Can a rational human being explain to me why any of us should care in the slightest about a Ralph Nader proposal he calls “necessary” for college sports? Judging from this, you’d think it’s the most significant pronouncement about the game since Cecil Newton’s sordid tale was condemned.
It’s not like Nader hasn’t whipped out the stoopid before, people.
Get The Picture 
But won’t all this hot air coming from Nader affect global warming? I thought he was green.
LikeLike
Well, if you take away all of the scholarships from college athletes and keep the same NCAA rules regarding amateurism in place, then college athletics really DOES become unethical. At that point, you’d be prohibiting kids from making any money off of their image, athletic talents, and also preventing them from getting a free college education. Oh, and by the way, the colleges are still going to be rolling around in money like a hog in slop, because people are still going to love college football. Essentially, you’re talking about moving from a situation where the athlete has to watch while the schools make millions off of his team while he only profits with a college education to a situation where the athlete has to watch while the schools make millions off of his team while he profits absolute zero, while racking up student loan debt. What a stupid idea.
LikeLike
GD, we already have what you are talking about in your post in D-III. Are you saying that all those kids are being taken advantage of by their schools and the NCAA?
LikeLike
No, I’m not, though I think that kids who aren’t able to use their athletic talents to pay for school should be able to receive any other kind of academic grant out there. I don’t know the rules for D-III, but I know D-I is funny about that sort of thing. You shouldn’t be penalized for being an athlete.
I think the main difference between D-III and taking scholarships away from D-I is that the schools in D-III are there because they’re not making the kind of money off of athletics that would support scholarships, etc. If a D-III school suddenly gained the kind of following where their coaches were making huge salaries and the school’s athletic department was raking in money hand over fist, yeah, I’d have a problem with that.
LikeLike
Do you have a problem with the original concept of collegiate athletics–that is supposed to be students competing against each other representing their colleges and that it was about the sport and not about the money? Do you think that the fact that the schools have started making lots of dough has changed the original mission of intercollegiate athletics at least at the D-IA level?
LikeLike
More likely, it would advance the development of professional minor leagues that would over time siphon off the best talent.
Arguing that a scholarship (with which many of these players are then clustered into bogus courses, worthless majors, etc.) is some dividing line between ethical and unethical is pretty weak.
LikeLike
Not unless somebody’s willing to pay for those leagues to exist.
LikeLike
Of course. But with players not being allowed scholarships, the market for labor for the new leagues would have a much lower price, thus making it easier for such teams and leagues to be profitable than it has been with state institutions subsidizing a quasi-socialist college football league.
LikeLike
You honestly think the only thing prohibiting football minor leagues from springing up is high salaries?
In a world where Reggie Ball is gainfully employed in a minor league playing arena ball, I think you’re off base.
LikeLike
No, nor did I say they were.
What I said was that lowering the price point for HS talent would open the market that much more.
Sure, but that’s a different segment of the labor pool. The current minor football leagues (CFL, arena, UFL, etc.) take talent that has been rejected by the NFL. Not far more valuable prospects (such as those found in baseball, hockey, and, increasingly, foreign and developmental domestic basketball leagues).
LikeLike
You’re probably right on that front, Tex, though minor leagues currently exist for baseball and athletes still choose to participate in the unethical collegiate system anyway, for some reason. I doubt that as many professional-caliber athletes would in the event that the scholarship incentive suddently disappeared. I’ve had some fun with your comments, and I do apologize for that, but I don’t think that everything’s just great in college sports. The system needs to be fixed, and I do want them to do something about eliminating oversigning. That’s only one rule which needs to be written, and many others need to be changed.
LikeLike
Why do you believe it’s unethical? (I don’t believe the system itself is unethical, fwiw. Just many players within it.)
And, yes, there are still college baseball teams just as there would still be college football teams. But the talent on the college baseball teams is far, far, far less than what it is in the minor leagues. And that’s with college baseball still having scholarships.
LikeLike
Well, I personally don’t think it’s unethical. I threw that in there for you, from reading your posts I’d gotten the impression you felt college athletics had become the realm of the unethical.
LikeLike
OK. Certainly not the only place you’ve misunderstood what I’ve said.
LikeLike
You’re right in the case of the majority of collegiate baseball teams. However, the teams at major college powers could hold their own in the South Atlantic League. When draft prospects from college teams hit the minors, they usually end up at least in high-A to begin with, so there’s some merit to the way college ball is played. The reason college baseball is still good is that some high school draftees who don’t get their name called high enough for big time bonus bucks go to college to play and get another crack at getting drafted higher (or by a different organization) later on. As a byproduct, they get a college education in case the baseball thing doesn’t work out. I’ve got zero problem with that. I think that phenomenon goes away tomorrow, though, if they can no longer get scholarships.
LikeLike
Exactly. The very best players off of college teams typically end up in high-A ball… on entire teams of players at their same level. Even the best college teams would get destroyed over full seasons in high-A ball. If college teams were the equivalent of even high-A ball teams, you would see basically every college player move straight to high-A ball. Instead, even on the best teams, very few make it onto minor league rosters.
20 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But with the massive investments that have been made in Dominican and Venezuelan baseball (as well as in other countries), the scene is entirely different now. The Dominicans and Venezuelans are putting out bat boys that could waste most American college players.
No doubt, and while that wouldn’t happen overnight with football, once minor league football clubs were allowed to capitalize on the newly opened segment of the market for football labor, the same situation in football wouldn’t be far behind. It would start with 3-star and the occasional low 4-star recruit jumping straight to the $100,000 or so contract. (Currently you’d have to pay a lot more to get even these Tier 2/Tier 3 recruits to pass up what a D1A program offers them.) As more of this happened and the quality of play in the minor leagues began to grow, so too would the attendance and ratings, and thus media and ad dollars, of such leagues, in turn allowing them to lure increasingly better recruits to jump straight to their leagues.
The NFL would then have to decide if it really wanted to keep its minimum age rule where it is. Not doing so would increasingly force NFL clubs to pay higher dollar to buy non-NFL players away from the minor league clubs. Higher labor costs for their businesses. They would likely drop their minimum age by a year or two, if not completely. And with even dropping the minimum age by just 1 year (i.e. to 2 years removed from HS) the lure of the minor leagues would grow that much more as now recruits would only be having to turn down 2 years of CFB instead of being locked into whichever route they chose for 3 years.
Anyway, Nader’s idea won’t happen, but it is a good example of the type of pressure that is going to grow on CFB as the money continues to skyrocket (and other issues such as CTE pressure the amateur status of the game from other directions).
LikeLike
You do know the history of amateurism, where the movement started, and the motivation behind it, right? The scholarship system has not cured the system of cheating, rule breaking and unethical behavior.
Since Nader’s system already exists at the D-III level, I would expect D-I athletics to gradually evolve (devolve?) towards the D-III model in terms of participating athletes, level of competition and fan interest.
Without the scholarship model to attract potential student-athletes, the best and brightest football players who do not have the financial means to pay for school and who know true interest in achieving a college degree would be forced to find a job. This increase in an available talent pool and the elimination of competition would make starting additional professional football leagues either as competition or in conjunction with the NFL very attractive. In theory, the players would earn a wage that is more market driven than the current scholarship model. It would remain to be seen if that wage would be equal to the value of the current scholarship.
LikeLike
If you’re saying pay the college players, and they can apply that payment to tuition if they wish, then I have no problem with that. If a kid can get a separate scholarship to pay for school and then pocked the rest of his football salary, then that’s awesome. I think it opens up a lot of questions that need to be answered in terms of competition and recruiting, though. A lot of Division I hangers-on are going to have to break away from the big boys in that event.
LikeLike
if that assmonkey hadn’t been on the ballot in 2000 a lot of folks would have avoided death and injury half aworld away. what a douche.
LikeLike
I thought H Ross Perot ran in 92?
LikeLike
+(Expletive) 10!
Iraq and the collapse of the economy were unintended consequences of the swing-axle suspensions of the ’60-’63 Corvairs
LikeLike
Those really WERE bad cars…
LikeLike
Only for those who didn’t like being in rollovers. After all, they were using technology from the 1910 Sopwiths and Fokkers.
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Swing_axle?qsrc=3044
LikeLike
That’s pretty doubtful.
LikeLike
Exactly. Thank God we got a bona fide liberal in office to end the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and not initiate any other conflicts (in Libya, for example). Wait…
LikeLike
Don’t know what the cowardly Saudi pilots, kooky Ghadafi, and Queer Bin had to do with Nader’s decision but I am sure that in the mind of you warped Leftists there is a connection. Along with Georgia’s most prominent embarrassment, and Oh Bama, Al Bore could have given us our three worst Presidents in US history in a 30 year period of time. What a celebration you girls could have had. Douche indeed!
How does that sand taste Z? I guess we could have loved Al Queda to death, or sat around and sang campfire songs…..
LikeLike
One douche leads to another:
“After Reagan we stooped so low we put the Caligula Kid in the White House. Twice. That little dry-drunk planetary-scale disaster of rampant personal insecurity spent almost the entirety of his last term in office with job approval ratings down around twenty-five or thirty percent. But since he didn’t commit the grave crime of getting a blow job from someone other than his wife, no one even talked about removing him from office. No, he only was asleep at the wheel for 9/11, lied us into a disastrous war, shredded the Constitution, allowed one of our major cities to drown, plunged us into debt, made the whole world hate us, polarized the country, and then left us the goodbye gift of the worst global economic catastrophe since the Great Depression. But here we are, a mere two years later, having brought back the same crowd in record-setting droves, only this time they’re even worse, as unimaginable as that seems, like a tribe of political crackhead vampire zombies, locked in mindless unrelenting pursuit of sucking dry the national blood supply.”
http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Articles/The_Sole_Remaining_Stupidpower_In_The_World.html
LikeLike
I’m just glad Obama closed Gitmo, ended renditions and stopped that silly “war on terror”.
LikeLike
Yeah. It’s been two years and two months now and he hasn’t squared-away the eight years’ worth of steaming piles of shit left to him by the Bush-Cheney chickenhawks.
With all the wonderful help he’s been getting from his enemies – the House and Senate Republicans and their disinformation outlet apparatchiks – how could he not have taken care of everything by now?
LikeLike
Yeah, it was that Karl Rove calling the shots! He told Pelosi and her 75 seat majority and Reid and his super majority to screw Obama in 2009 and 2010. That’s why Obama began a shadow war in Yemen, bombing raids in Pakistan and didn’t repeal a single provision of the Patriot Act. Damn that Rove!
Sure, some people would point out that being Commander in Chief requires tough choices. They might point out that even a community organizer might find renditions, drone strikes and military trials an unfortunate but necessary part of war. But you and I both know this is just disinformation and its really Haliburton’s fault. 🙂
LikeLike
The Democratic Party is not an opposition party to the Republicans. Its so-called ‘leaders’ and its presidents have been unclear on the concept of how to take the offensive, rather than just counterpunch, against the Republicans since LBJ.
Aside from the idea of no meaningful opposition party, which is pretty substantial, I am not quite as sure about renditions but suggest that if the CIA farms people out under any retained revised policy, it would now to places that do not torture them.
“First, it is very important to keep in mind that there are numerous factions with a very compelling interest in claiming that the Obama administration is preserving and continuing the most extreme Bush “counter-terrorism” policies, regardless of whether or not it’s true:
(1) Bush followers eager to claim that their leader has been vindicated because Obama is replicating his policies…”
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/02/02/renditions/
No problem with drone strikes inside Pakistan v. Taliban and other evildoers. Cuts down on number of amputees at Walter Reed. Not keen on drone collateral damage but who wants an evildoer, who is not our puppet, to be in control of Pakistan’s nukes?
Are they still doing military trials or are they civilian trials or a mixture? I haven’t followed that in detail but am pleased that at least some who were captured under last administration actually get a trial and not indefinite imprisonment and torture.
Re Patriot Act provisions not being repealed, have a ton more faith that Obama will not circumvent those provisions as last administration did and then lie that bad acts were covered by Patriot Act provisions.
Re Obama’s shadow war in Yemen,
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/obamas-shadow-war-on-terror/
I have no problem with that because he’s going after al-Queda, the very same ***kers that little Bush should have gone after but purposely didn’t to keep his GWOT theme alive to distract Americans while they were being looted for eight years.
Halliburton/KBR? Made a ton of money off us during Iraq. Great outfits unless you happen to be a chick who is not into getting gangbanged raped and then locked into a shipping container.
http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2007/12/nobody-could-have-predicted-halliburton.html
LikeLike
So:
rendition of known terrorist = bad
drone strike on village of suspected terrorist = good
“have a ton more faith that Obama will not circumvent those provisions as last administration did”
Define “circumvent”.
-Is bombing Libya without Congressional approval “circumvention”? (BTW, W got Congressional OK in Iraq and Afghan).
-Is a stated policy attempting the assassination of a US citizen in Yemen “circumvention”?
RE: Haliburton
-Who would you suggest deliver 10,000 port-a-potties to the Hindu Kush? 2 Guys and a Truck?
-Who can deliver 1 million sporks a month to bases in Iraq, Eritrea & Bahrain? Sysco?
Don’t hate the player, hate the game.
LikeLike
Did not say any rendition of known terrorist was bad. It would be bad if we shipped someone off to be tortured though. Do not know whether we have renditioned anyone.
Am not sure but was the Patriot Act a basis for Libya?
I haven’t studied it but its a false equivalency to compare our incoming stikes into Libya with the Iraq attack. Whenever we assemble forces similar to what we had for that attack, maybe then it would not be.
W. may have had congressional okay from his Congress and the weak Democrats in it but it was based on Gulf of Tonkin incident facts – untruths that were known by some and should have been known by all.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201103250012
Halliburton made money from a concocted ‘war’ created for it and Big Oil. Even so, if those contracts had been put out to bid and if a bid had been given to any other outfit, it seems it could have been carried out. Besides Halliburton probably would have written the bids for the government anyway.
http://www.halliburtonwatch.org/about_hal/chronology.html
LikeLike
Do you make new tin foil hats every day or weekly?
LikeLike
Every day because the demand is so high. It’s a Reynolds Aluminum Foil multi-level home-based business gig. When I make them, for health and safety reasons, I goggle up and wear my Perno-autographed Georgia baseball cap backwards like a Trooper along with a catcher’s cup to protect my balls from the sharp corners on the trifolds.
Tin foil hats are essential wingnut headgear accesssories.
My celebrity customers are Michelle Bachmann, the conspiracy theorists at WorldNetDaily, Mel Gibson and the liars at Fox News.
“Tin Foil Hat Wearer –
Usually denoting some one as crazy. In later years to describe some one who usually believes everything is a conspiracy or illusion. Brought on by a belief that there is a invisible, intangible, army of Liberal Jew Communist, trying to control their mind with RF signals. So as a means of “defense” against the unreal onslaught against the LJCPMCM (Liberal Jew Communist Propaganda Mind Control Machine or media) they start covering their head with Tin Foil. Made famous by Mel Gibson, though mostly worn by the staff of the Fox News network.”
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tin%20Foil%20Hat%20Wearer
Of course, my highest volume customers are the Teabaggers.
chttp://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/08/black-helicopters-over-nashville.html
LikeLike
Teabagger hat link
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/08/black-helicopters-over-nashville.html
LikeLike
When you say concocted “war” which concocted “war” are you talking about? Desert Storm, the Invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan or the original one, Viet Nam? The players in each behind the scenes were different although the motive was the same. Ike was right.
LikeLike
I think you would be better served by sticking to football. Please remember that political exhortations split us apart and we need to stick together during this time of losing seasons.
LikeLike
My post was meant for that “guy” in Florida…….. I must say as a libertarian, I usually side with the conservatives, especially on fiscal matters, BUT, let’s stick to our love of dear old UGA.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t sell Obama short, DIF. He’s accomplished quite a lot. He’s borrowed $3 trillion since he took office. And he only plans to keep spending at higher and higher rates. With any luck, we won’t have to settle for bankrupting our children and grandchildren. We can bankrupt ourselves in short order. 🙂
LikeLike
And I’m sure your a Reagan fan despite the fact that he campaigned on a “balanced budget” when the deficit was 60 billion annually and ballooned it to 300. The reason that the deficit is larger now is: 1) bush kept Iraq and afghanistan off of the books. Obama put it on the books so we could see the costs. 2) the economy cratered in bush’s term. That means less revenues. 3). When private money flow comes to a schreechibg halt the government is the only one who can spend which keeps the economy going. What we saw in 2008 was 1929 all over again. Will it take 16 years to get out of it? It doesn’t appear so. Of course you could be thankful or stupid. I already know which you’ll choose. No need to clarify.
LikeLike
You tell him D!
Sure, deficit to GDP ratio was almost identical from Carter’s last budget to Reagan’s last budget (2.53 in ’81, 2.79 in ’89, but who has time to compare apples to apples when its a lot more fun to compare apples to oranges!
What America needed was 4 more years of soft spoken rudderless leadership from that school yard scold. Hostages in Iran? Meh. Double digit unemployment AND inflation? Meh.
Then we could’ve gone into the Mondale admin in ’84. Now THAT would’ve convinced the Soviets to pack it up.
LikeLike
Exactly right, we have moved the US Death Clock forward with this group of radicals. I was always sure the timing would be crucial for my grandkids’ generation, now it looks like I will see the reformulation. You can’t give all the credit to Oh Bama though, the Leftists have been working on this since the 60’s; I hate to leave Roosevelt out because he certainly deserves some credit but the last 45 years are clearly where we began spiraling out of control. I will agree though, the last two plus years have been a horror show. (Within the past week we have now begun hitting new lows with our elite military: we are taking military orders from the freaking French! This community organizer, and his team, could not arrange a one car funeral.) Precious metals boys, before they run out of ink in DC.
LikeLike
Yeah I heard the same thing in 1993 and I hope you idiots all missed out on the greatest bill market ever bc you were in gold.
LikeLike
Even though I wish he would be more aggressive to his Republican enemies because that’s how you have to treat bullies, for reasons that are a mystery to me, he takes a softer, gentler approach with them. Notwithstanding that, I don’t sell him short. He’s done a lot.
http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2010/1104_obama_galston.aspx
http://b4bmorenews.blogspot.com/2010/09/new-244-accomplishments-of-president.html
He has political difficulties because the economy remains tanked and because there will always be people who believe stuff like this:
– Something to Behold –
“As you know, we have cable news running in our news room permanently, flipping back and forth between the three biggies. And the percentage flow of obvious falsehoods, outright lies and what frequently verges on or passes for hate speech is just awe-inspiring. In an awful sort of way, but still awe-inspiring. I know it. You know it. But when I actually listen, pay attention to the stuff they’re saying, wow. It’s amazing that this exists as one of the big sources of news in this country. Just now we were listening to Megyn Kelly interview Mike Gallagher. Okay, I got it off my chest.”
–Josh Marshall
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2011/03/something_to_behold_2.php?ref=fpblg
LikeLike
Well, at least he did state voters need to “punish..enemies”. Certainly a first for a POTUS to refer to political opponents as enemies to be punished, no? You should be proud Dog.
http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/25/obamas-turnout-pitch-to-latinos-get-out-there-and-punish-your-enemies/
Call me old fashioned, but I pine for the days when our POTUS saw tinpot dictators as enemies to be dealt with.
LikeLike
Hadn’t heard that but am proud of him for saying the words ‘punish’ and ‘enemies’ even though it offended the delicate sensibilities of swiftboating Republicans everywhere.
Ron should have taken Mohammar’s ass out then rather than not completing the job.
LikeLike
http://www.google.com/search?q=ralph+nader+eliminate+athletic+college+scholarships&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=ralph+nader+eliminate+athletic+college+scholarships&hl=en&safe=active&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivnso&source=lnms&tbs=mbl:1&ei=IrCLTeXSLqyB0QGHn_3oDQ&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&cd=9&ved=0CB4Q_AUoCA&prmdo=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=3ad100f71558fc89
wow what an ugly link, but a much better link for the “this” in your post, senator. Realtime on the intertubes no one cares…now google real time Lohan for a sense of what is popping.
LikeLike
I don’t see Mr. Nader as much in the way of a sports fan. Certainly not a college football fan.
He should focus on that which he knows well: putting flares in gas tanks & battery wires in streams
LikeLike
“Can a rational human being explain to me why any of us should care in the slightest about a Ralph Nader proposal he calls “necessary” for college sports?”
Sure I can. We should care because sports have become far more about things that happen OFF the field of play, as opposed to the actual games themselves. The athletes we call legends all played in an era that has passed. That’s because we no longer value amazing feats of athleticism as much as broadcast contracts and merch sales. Anyone who is a TRUE fan of the game, whatever game it may be, cares far more about the thrill of the action than they do about getting the latest sneakers. So, unless your life goal is to be an unpaid shill for the rich owners and execs who could care less, then his proposal has some merit. I’m not suggesting that we should adopt his proposal, but any fan can admit that it has SOME merit. But more than that let’s be honest here. You don’t like Nader and he could stand up and say the sky is blue and you would have a problem with it. Fair enough, everyone has the right to be ignorant. One should realize, however, that a significant majority of privileges enjoyed by consumers, including the ability to mouth off on an under-informed blog, are in place due to his personal effort. Without a doubt you will roll your eyes at this and willfully ignore it. Lucky for you he struggled so that you have that choice. Something tells me that’s far more than you have contributed to the world. So keep being a hater and I hope you like your new jersey at least half as much as some rich executive likes the money he’s pocketing from fleecing you for far more than its worth.
LikeLike
” but any fan can admit that it has SOME merit.”
As can any fan admit that this is somewhat misguided
“Fair enough, everyone has the right to be ignorant.”
Disliking Nader and his ideas doesn’t merit name calling: If you disagree with me, you just aren’t smart enough to understand.
“Lucky for you he struggled so that you have that choice.”
He’s a lawyer – were talking about Nader here, not Jesus.
LikeLike
“He’s a lawyer – were talking about Nader here, not Jesus.”
http://instantrimshot.com/
LikeLike
Chiding the Senator for ignorance while extolling the freedoms that Mr. Nader has provided us. Classic!
LikeLike
Dude, of all the places to trot out a “you haven’t been in the arena” argument…
It’s not about hating or liking Nader. It’s about why anyone should give his proposals the time of day when they have about as much chance of being adopted as you or I do of suiting up this season and winning the Heisman. (My apologies if you’re Andrew Luck.)
Nadar is an egotistical gadfly, nothing more, nothing less. Move on, there’s nothing to see there.
LikeLike
Did someone page an egotistical gadfly?
LikeLike
Huh? Somebody just nudged me.
LikeLike
Show the man some respect. He’s the Late Ralph Nader.
http://www.automobilemag.com/features/columns/0502_ralph_nader/index.html
LikeLike
Nader’s easy to dismiss as he’s a radical, but he’s an example of a growing trend. Collegiate athletics is starting to get a lot more attention from people, organizations, and institutions that aren’t that interested in wins and losses but on a lot of serious problems collegiate athletic operations are causing.
As the money continues to boom, the problems and attention to them are only going to increase.
LikeLike
What problems are those? The only real problems I’m seeing are kids getting something that someone semi-arbitrarily decided they should not have.
Other than that, college athletics are a wonderful contribution to our society in terms of a hobby and an economic machine.
Point being that the problems with college athletics are little internal struggles that don’t mean a damn thing in the scheme of things. I think it’s only those of us who really care about the wins and losses who see big problems with college sports.
Anyone outside that is just trying to get a quote in the paper.
LikeLike
Young, often very poor teenagers, many from communities that are the products of extreme marginalization over centuries, playing an extremely violent sport (the violence of which we are increasingly finding is much, much more damaging than once thought) for compensation that is incredibly small relative to the revenues their risk-taking and work produces for others. (The ability of the operators of these teams being able to pay so little and thus reap such huge profits being largely the product of these operators being heavily subsidized by government institutions, thus greatly pricing private competitors out of the market.)
Additional problems that come along with this quasi-socialist arrangement are academic institutions facing much greater incentives for corruption and unethical behavior.
Sorry, but the first sentence there is completely wrong, and with the latter something approaching the exact opposite is the case.
I love college football and its great traditions, amazing history, and so on. There is much of it that has great redeeming value, and that’s why I would so greatly like to see the very serious problems it is facing disappear. But if you don’t believe it is facing some very serious problems (e.g. CTE, widespread academic fraud, the serious injustices resulting from oversigning, etc.), then you just don’t understand the reality of the situation.
LikeLike
Well in all fairness it could be a League of Fans (electric). I like how they want to get rid of the “win at all costs” mentality. Someone should tell Charlie Sheen that Nadar doesn’t like him winning.
LikeLike
I think his proposal (foolishly) is composed of circular logic. First, eliminate scholarships. Next, provide financial aid to those in need. Conclusion…Crowell gets offered the starting tailback job (damn the violation, CMR!!!) AND full tuition, books, living quarters, meals and stipend…oh wait….
LikeLike
Nader really knows how to be a conversational item.
LikeLike
What about “need based scholarships” for those who otherwise qualify academically? The problem I see is that in an effort to win/make money colleges are basically running a minor league franchise with little interest in providing an education for atheletes who think they are getting screwed in the process and then look to other sources in order to achieve what they consider fair. Let’s just play with students who want to also play ball. I understand that the worst schools will get the best players, but Harvard and Yale and Army survived the shift and so would we. The only reason it won’t happen is the same reason it should: money.
LikeLike
Once again, I was wondering how a post on Nader’s proposal garnered 35+ comments. Then I hit the political arguments. Again.
LikeLike
Yeah, I thought it was going to be about a sequel to the Tom Hanks movie in which the women softball players got fanned. Then the virtual firefight started.
To summarize:
http://www.netrootsmass.net/hughs-bush-scandals-list/
and all the bad stuff that’s going on? It’s all on the Leftists who have a Master Plan that makes them feed good
LikeLike