Today, in filthy lucre

So, this was a thing.

It was that kind of weird and wonderful night Thursday at the Coca-Cola Roxy at Battery Park. DawgNation brought back the core leadership group of Georgia’s 2017 team to say thanks to them and to show appreciation to the many sponsors and readers that followed the Bulldogs every step of the way this past season. In turn, those players shared background and anecdotes about the 13-2 season, which included a win over Oklahoma in the Rose Bowl and and a dramatic overtime loss to Alabama National Championship Game at Mercedes Benz Stadium.

It was considered one of the most special seasons in Georgia history. And it was, according to Chubb, Michel, Davin Bellamy, Lorenzo Carter and Roquan Smith .The quintet posed for pictures, signed autographs, swapped stories and hobnobbed witDawgNation sponsors and fans in the Roxy’s expansive venue next to the Braves’ SunTrust Park. The whole affair was quite a study in free enterprise and adulation.

Chubb, Michel and Smith were the feature act. They were the paid stars originally booked and contracted through their respective representatives to be featured at this event. Bellamy and Carter came on board when the buzz began to swell and it became clear that hundreds of fans planned to participate. When the official announcement was released via social media, good buddies Bellamy and Carter raised their hands to be included, and were.

“The whole affair was quite a study in free enterprise…”  Just wondering from those of you in the it’s what’s on the front of the jersey that matters camp:  should the five have had to share what they received with the school?  And, hypothetically speaking, had this event been put on a year ago and the five paid for it then, would that have ruined last season for you?

Advertisements

90 Comments

Filed under Georgia Football, It's Just Bidness

90 responses to “Today, in filthy lucre

  1. Nope. They are no longer under scholarship and bound to the universities or the NCAA by-laws. That simple. And while I do think there should be additional funds, say $1,000.00 a month per player; I do not believe in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, or bidding for players, etc. And if this sounds like a small amount, it comes to about $1MM a year in salaries for players. Almost all violations are over very small dollars. Growing up poor, I can tell you that this would make a ‘huge’ difference to some of these kids and their families. Add this to the monies received for their own travel for bowl games and then pay for families to travel in for games and I think you have something that would cover a lot of the challenges. But big big dollars… No… That will get out of control really quick.. Why people think that this could be policed, when the NBA, NFL, MLB all had to install salary caps for leagues that average 30 teams is beyond me.

    Like

  2. Chickamona

    What a strange event for a newspaper that is ostensibly supposed to be objectively covering the team to put on.

    Like

  3. Big Max

    Is this kosher with regard to journalistic ethics? Seems that a newspaper that covers/covered the players is brokering an arrangement whereby the players are getting compensated.

    Maybe I don’t have all the details right, but this is very odd for the AJC.

    Like

  4. David K.

    OK, to play devil’s advocate because I agree with you in theory but there’s a slippery slope to opening up college football to free markets and easy money. I don’t think many have an issue with events like these, or players getting paid to sign autographs, etc. But this will lead to bidding wars for high school kids that will start EARLY. Boosters and schools even will be allowed to start promising cash and signing bonuses to high schoolers and the deepest pockets will have huge advantages. Where kids sign will come down to who can offer the most money above all else. Maybe I’m naive and this is the case already with the mysterious bagmen out there. I’m all for endorsement deals and these kids getting what they deserve. I just hate to see the free market get into the recruiting.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Normaltown Mike

    I demand they give that money to women’s volleyball team!

    Like

  6. LFCDawg

    I was at the event and there were a few things that I had never heard before (maybe these were common knowledge, but they were new to me): Roquan said he threw up before almost every game (Chip mentions that in the linked story). Nick and Sony said they never discussed whether they were going to stay for their senior years until they both had already made the decision. Nick said he was worried because he figured Sony was going to stay and he didn’t want to take away Sony’s chance to be the featured back. Nick also said he was “basically gone” throughout the season (thinking he would turn pro), but that the Tech game changed all of that for him. Talk about losing the battle but winning the war! Sony also had a nice anecdote about when Richt told the team he had been fired and broke down crying in front of the team – and they all started crying.

    Like

  7. And, hypothetically speaking, had this event been put on a year ago and the five paid for it then, would that have ruined last season for you?

    If this were put on a year ago, nobody would have attended.

    But, hypothetically speaking, in a world where athletes have the rights to their own likeness and can get appearance fees for events and get sponsorships, I have no problem with any of this. The NCAA can take a hardline stance on giving salaries and making players contracted employess, but give the athletes the ability to profit off their own likeness. They can hang their hats on the faux amateurism, but allow stars to make money like olympians do. It’s a good enough compromise that benefits everyone. Too bad, nobody that can do anything is interested in an actual solution.

    Liked by 1 person

    • JCDAWG83

      The problem would be that boosters like Yella Fella would pay blue chip kids $100,000 to have their picture taken with him if they went to Auburn and the Bull Gator Clubs would have $100,000 “Meet ____________ Day” for the top players and whatever the Texas A&M group is would host big money picture days for top players. Once the door is open for paying players, the cat is out of the bag and it becomes a bidding war.

      Being pro vs. amateur is a bright line distinction. Trying to find a middle ground is like trying to be a little bit pregnant.

      Like

      • Once the door is open for paying players, the cat is out of the bag and it becomes a bidding war.

        They’re already being paid. That cat’s already been out of the bag for awhile now.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Normaltown Mike

          Ah c’mon.

          college football has only been shady for what, 60, 70 years?

          Like

          • Shoot man, some of the commenters here should read up about how Michigan got kicked out of the Western Conference (pre-cursor to the Big 10) in 1907 to see how long amateurism protocol has been skirted by the schools themselves.

            Like

      • Boosters wouldn’t be ponying up $100,000 a pop if they had to do it every year for multiple athletes. The reason they can fetch those numbers now is because the market is not efficient. The dealings happen behind closed doors, so the value is artificially inflated due to scarcity. Would some boosters try to ink ridiculous deals with players? Sure. Some would. I don’t have a problem with that either. Trying to buy a championship is a one-time outlay, and it might happen that way for truly elite players. Ongoing outlays couldn’t reach those numbers because nobody can afford it.

        Liked by 2 people

        • Exactly. Not to get all spidery, but this reminds me of people immediately yelling out “George Soros funded” or “Koch brothers funded” anytime there’s a protest for / against whatever they care about. Do those persons provide funds for some of those things? Sure. Do the resources actually exist to spend the amount of money that their opponents allege? Not even close.

          I love how in all these arguments people act like open markets aren’t subject to resource constraints. YellaWood doesn’t have an infinite sum of cash, y’all. Rich people don’t stay rich by spending their money wildly on their hobbies.

          Like

        • Cosmic Dawg

          Great comments, both of you. I don’t give a damn if somebody wants to pay Sony Michel or a great piano player or a cancer researcher to go to UGA. What, ultimately, is the difference between handing somebody cash and putting up a private scholarship?

          What is the substantive difference between being a student in a rock band where people pay admission to go see you and being paid to sign an autograph for somebody?

          The most annoying thing is – there are people out there who would pay the money voluntarily, but apparently many fans, the NCAA and the schools would prefer to jump through hoops and figure out stipends, costs of attendance, etc – any way but the simple way, which is let the market do it for you.

          Liked by 1 person

  8. Tatum

    No offense to the long snappah, but the only people paying to see him are his parents. They should be compensated in some fashion.

    Like

  9. Bamadawg

    It’s amazing how just about every other story on here now is about paying the players. Or at least there are innuendos You have worn me down. I change my mind. I think every college athlete should be paid. The NCAA either needs to totally remove the law about not paying players, or institute a draft. Either way the way we see college football now is obviously done. If there is no draft then players can go to the highest bidder. I mean thats what you want right? Was Nick, Sony, or Roquan worth a million dollars last year? Probably. But lets just forget about that CONTRACT they agreed to. You know, the one they signed while the gun was to their head.

    Its come to the point that this site could turn an article about anything into “Well if they were being paid….”, or “if they weren’t being taken advantage of…..”.

    Jake Fromm spent the weekend in a local fishing tournament. Get The Pictures spin: Jake Fromm had to borrow a boat to fish so he could feed his family. If he was properly paid by UGA he could have bought his own boat.

    Liked by 1 person

    • If you’re not interested in the subject, don’t read the posts about it.

      Like

      • Bamadawg

        I enjoy reading other posts on your site, so I start reading s post and then BAM, the “if players were fairly compensated” crap pops up. May you should put something in the title of the posts, like “warning blah, blah,” so those of us tired of the dead horse can skip it.

        Also, and you may have already posted it and i missed it, what is your solution to this national crisis?

        Like

        • TnDawg

          The Senator solution is obvious, let the free market handle it. Has offered nothing to the other problems this will bring. Just change the game and have the Pizza Hut UGA Bulldogs(to paraphrase an Augusta National Chairman). What the hell!

          Like

          • An interpretation that manages to be both simplistic and misleading. And, no, I’m not going to answer the inevitable next question, because you’re either too lazy or too stubborn to read and understand my posts.

            Like

            • Bamadawg

              So you dont have an answer. Got it. Works for me.

              I do like the Pizza Hut Bulldogs. The color schemes kinda match up.

              Like

              • For somebody who claims to be tired of my posts on the subject, you sure don’t seem to have read many of them.

                That’s the great thing about a blog with more than 21,000 posts — if you’d make the effort to keep an open mind, you might actually find some answers by looking around. It’s not like I’ve been subtle.

                Like

                • Sides

                  I have read a good chuck of your posts for the past few years. I have a good idea what you think but I have no idea how you would fix it. In some posts you think the free market should determine all value and on other posts you complain how commercialization has ruined the game you love. You talk constantly about the nostalgia of watching the Georgia Bulldogs in South Bend and Pasadena but you couldn’t stand watching the games if the players were paid professionals and these stadiums have endorsement deals. I would like to see you propose some actual policies that you think would be fair for the players, schools, and keep the fan base happy. Once we know where you stand then we wouldn’t have to argue over all these snarky, two sided posts.

                  Btw, 21,000 posts is impressive. You should have gone pro directly out of high school. Think of all that ad revenue you missed by staying in school.

                  Like

                  • I’m not in a position to “fix” anything, so it’s a little absurd to ask me to propose something to that effect.

                    Here’s what I can say, though: the NCAA has been ruled a cartel in violation of antitrust law. Its position is untenable. At some point in time somebody like Kessler is going to clean its clock and the world some of you fear is going to be ushered in as a direct result. Whether that world is my first choice or not isn’t nearly as relevant in my mind as the powers that be simply recognizing that the take or leave it amateurism protocol is exploitative and that they take steps allowing student-athletes to negotiate a fairer share of the pie. I don’t care so much about what the slice looks like as I do that the players get a piece that they bargained for in good faith. That’s freer and fairer than the status quo.

                    It’s time for everyone to quit pretending that a scholarship, room and board represent fair consideration for the contributions and worth of a number of student-athletes. It wouldn’t for those of us out in the real world and it shouldn’t for them.

                    Like

                    • Sides

                      I appreciate your comments. I hope you realize most people believe players should get more money/benefits (or whatever they want to call it). I don’t think most scholarships (or college education in general) is worth what they are valued to be. I am sure a large chunk of the players don’t find it worth much at all. If I were a player I assure you I would be complaining. There are benefits such as coaching and weight/nutrition programs that are more valuable than most people think.

                      This is an honest question from a non-lawyer to a lawyer. Has the NCAA really been ruled a cartel in violation of anti trust laws? Didn’t they find certain NCAA rules violated antitrust law? In the world of big business I feel like companies are found all the time to violate laws, they pay restitution and change some procedures and move on. It seems like that is what the NCAA did. I know there are more lawsuits and there will continue to be. They will nibble around the edges of the NCAA but they are never going to take them down. I think you are overstating the demise of the NCAA and amateurism in general.

                      Like

                    • I hope you realize most people believe players should get more money/benefits (or whatever they want to call it).

                      Not the noisiest ones here. 😉

                      With regard to your question, read O’Bannon.

                      As fare as your prediction goes, Jeffrey Kessler doesn’t nibble around the edges. My bet is that the NCAA winds up groveling before Congress for an antitrust exemption, probably doesn’t get one and then turns around and lets the players unionize so that costs can be controlled through a CBA.

                      Like

                    • Bamadawg

                      I appreciate the response. As for the noisest (spelling), if you look at most of my response, i do believe that they should get a larger “stipend”. I’m just afraid that a can of worms will explode. I hope UGA wins a NC before then, because I’m afraid I won’t be able to watch after that.

                      Like sides I’m not a lawyer, but I know that the scholarship is a contract (we had to cosign for my son because he was 17). So my question is how can there be anti-trust when college sports don’t have a monopoly? I mean there are semi-pro teams around the country that these kids could sign with instead of going to college?

                      Like

                    • You can’t collude to fix labor prices.

                      Like

                    • CB

                      You should probably stop sharing your gut feelings and do some research. You’re clearly an intelligent person, but what’s even more clear is you don’t know how this stuff works. The nebulous unknown is not an admissible point of contention as it is intangible and not covered under any sort of laws in this country. If you’re in favor of the NCAA colluding to fix compensation at a scholarship and COA, then that’s fine. We heard you the first 50 times you said it. Just put on your Che Guevara/ Bernie Sander “I’m an avowed socialist” t-shirt and move on to the next blog post.

                      https://www.etsy.com/listing/256802489/bernie-sanders-revolution-as-che-guevara

                      Like

                    • Sides

                      The next question is what does a CBA look like? The colleges and NCAA deserve it because of the way they have treated athletes for years. Does each incoming class negotiate their deal or do we get a big, shitty labor union that acts on behalf of these kids?

                      Like

                    • If I understand how they work — and I am by no means an expert — there would be a players union needed in order to negotiate a CBA.

                      Like

                  • By the way, it’s a stretch, IMO, to say that commercialization has ruined college football for me. I don’t have a problem in the world with people getting paid. What I have a problem with is college administrators and conference commissioners selling their souls for every last penny. Making money off playoffs isn’t what bothers me; it’s letting ESPN re-market the sport away from its traditional unique focus on regional appeal that does.

                    Like

                    • Bamadawg

                      I couldn’t reply to your other post for some reason, so I did it here. I understand what you are saying about collusion to fix labor prices, but I have a few more questions (if you dont mind).

                      Can you legally consider them laborers?
                      While I understand that the “fixed” price is a scholarship, isn’t each scholarship different due to the fact that costs of attendance is different at each school (not to mention in/out of state tuition)?
                      Lastly, doesn’t the same logic in #2 apply to the fact that each school was given the leeway to set thier own amounts for the stipends that are now being given athletes?

                      Thanks

                      Like

                    • With regard to your questions:

                      (1) Historically, “student-athlete” is a term the NCAA coined successfully to exempt schools from worker’s compensation liability. Rationally, I don’t know how you look at what student-athletes are required to do and not label that a job.
                      (2) What’s fixed isn’t the scholarship. It’s not having to pay S-As their open market worth. If I understand the recent spate of comments here, it appears that the majority of us recognize their open market worth is greater than the value of a scholarship.
                      (3) I think your point about the logic here is correct, although we reach different conclusions. It’s worth noting that the trial judge in O’Bannon capped that at $5000 a year, something the appellate court overruled.

                      Like

        • The post is headed “Today, in filthy lucre”. What exactly were you expecting?

          Like

    • Biggen

      I gotta say, that remark about fishing made me chuckle…

      Like

    • Huntindawg

      I agree with Bama about the plethora of posts here about paying players. I read this blog every day because I like to read about the Dawgs. I do appreciate occasional updates on the NCAA stuff, but there is the slightest whiff of dead horse floating around here.

      Yes, you’re right, I don’t have to read the posts. But on the other hand, I really appreciate LFC’s post about the event and the stories. This is just me, but I’d love to see more content like that and more discussion along those lines.

      Like

      • Red Cup

        Start your own effing blog.

        Like

        • Got Cowdog

          Hi, I’m Got and I am a GTP commenter. Based on the tone of the comment stream I feel compelled to offer some advice. I started following GTP because of peer pressure in 2009, when I was working for a company based in Athens. Now I can’t make it through the workday without stopping by the site a few times. Sometimes I don’t even read the articles, I just skip to the comments and comment on other comments. Sometimes I highlight the link that emails me when there are additional comments on the comments. I know of what I speak.
          If you see “Lucre” in any post title it will probably be about paying players, the Hartman fund, Greg Mcgarity’s salary, or the coffers at Butts-Mehre. “Musical Palate Cleanser” will typically have some sort of song attached. “Douchebaggery” will typically refer to an opposing coach wearing orange, and “The Genius” is Paul Johnson, the tech coach. My personal favorite topics are beer, bourbon, fried chicken and bar-b-que.
          I would suggest that other readers familiarize themselves with the lexicon, and with enough practice they too will be able to decide the posts with which they choose to waste valuable time.
          Love,
          Got Cowdog

          Like

        • Bamadawg

          What a effing dick

          Like

    • Tony Barnhart- Mr! CFB

      he’s a liberal and all liberals need an axe to grind. What won’t happen ? If everything changes and it screws up the whole thing we love, he’ll bitch and blame somebody else for such a bad idea.

      Like

      • I’m not a liberal. I’m a FREE MARKET SOCIALIST!

        Ignorant political insults are the best insults.

        Keep on truckin’.

        Like

        • Junkyardawg41

          LOL. awesome. I think you could do a post of ironic oxymorons that we all could get a kick out of. Free market socialist, conservative liberal, student athlete unpaid internship, etc. Sometimes your humor gets me chuckling. Thanks!

          Like

  10. junkyardawg41

    “Just wondering from those of you in the it’s what’s on the front of the jersey that matters camp: should the five have had to share what they received with the school?”

    Brand matters. If Dawg Nation set up the same event for Tua Tagovailoa (or any Bama star) to celebrate the “wonderful” OT thriller, how many UGA fans would have shown up? My point is we are invested in these players because of the name on the front of the jersey not because of the player themselves.

    Brands have value — anything that improves the brand has potential future cash flows associated with it. Just by participating in the event, the players enhanced the UGA brand. I would argue they are already sharing value (intrinsic) with their time.

    Like

    • If it’s the only name on the front of the jersey that drives value, then why do professional leagues negotiate with athletes to hand over 50+% of their revenues? Guys like Nick Chubb and Sony Michel are the reason the UGA brand has value.

      If the name on the front of the jersey is all that mattered, the Ivy Leagues would play in 90K seat stadiums and be on national television every Saturday. They certainly have no shortage of alumni that care deeply about their alma mater, likely enjoy sports, and also have the deep pockets to support their school.

      Better stated – if UGA went the route of an Ivy League school and stopped offering athletic scholarships thus permanently reducing the program to after-ran status because they no longer could compete for the top athletes, do you think passion for UGA football would be as high as we currently know it to be just because our University has a bunch of alumni with emotional attachments to the school? A lot of folks around here would have their wet dream of “real students” playing the sport, but it sure as shit wouldn’t be as popular or valuable as it is now either.

      Like

      • Huntindawg

        “A lot of folks around here would have their wet dream of “real students” playing the sport, but it sure as shit wouldn’t be as popular or valuable as it is now either.”

        I don’t know about that. If it was a level playing field, wouldn’t it have the same draw? Wouldn’t you get just as excited about UGA playing for the national championship if it was real students on the field? I’m pretty sure I would, and maybe even more so.

        Like

      • Junkyardawg41

        Not sure you understand my point, or perhaps I didn’t articulate it well. The situation is not binary I.e. it’s not one or the other. It’s one and the other. Although one carries more weight than the other. We aren’t invested in players because they are good players. We are invested in good players on our team. The more successful the players are, the more we are invested in our team. This is true for any sport.

        For instance, was someone a Braves fan because of Dale Murphy or was some one one a fan of Dale Murphy because he was a Brave. My guess is for most people is was both —- but probably not equally.

        Like

        • I understand your point and agree with it. My point was that it still doesn’t stop professional leagues from revenue sharing because without valuable players, there is no valuable league. Take Lebron James off the Cavaliers and I’m willing to bet dollars to donuts that the valuation of their team declines.

          Like

          • Junkyardawg41

            I totally agree with the Lebrun analogy. Out of curiosity, in your mind, does UGA football lose value because Sony, Chubb, Carter, Wynn, etc. have left to become professionals?

            Like

            • Junkyardawg41

              *Lebron

              Like

            • Ricky McDurden

              Comparing loss of a star player in basketball is a bit different than football if for no other reason than there are a lot more players to turn to as stars in football with the guys you mentioned being gone (Fromm, Swift, Baker, etc for example will sustain the brand). I think a better comparison would be does UGA basketball lose value without Yante Maten and I would argue that yes it does. Lord knows Yante was half the reason I bothered attending games this year, especially down the stretch. Crean is going to be a novelty but probably not enough to make me want to attend games in person next season.

              Like

            • Value for a college football program is all intrinsic considering there are no shareholders sharing in profits and it’s not a business that can be sold, so it’s hard to say that would be comparing apples to apples.

              That said – I suspect people that bought 1 and 27 jerseys over the past four years weren’t doing it because they loved Isaiah Crowell or Rhett McGowan.

              Like

    • Gaskilldawg

      Your position that we are invested in the players just because they are Georgia players has been tested in the marketplace. Let me tell you about one such marketplace. Buy a ticket for you and your significant other to th annual senior gala. I used to do so, and when I did they assigned every attendee to a table. They put a player at every table, so every attendee could dine with a player.
      The tables at which folks contributing to Hartman in my range sat got walkons as our player dinner companions. The big donor tables got the stars.

      If UGA AA felt that the attendees were vested only to the names on the front of the jersey and not the names on the back there would have been a more random distribution of walkons and stars.

      Like

      • Junkyardawg41

        My point is the front matters more than the back. In using your example of the Senior Gala, did you buy the tickets because of the players or did you buy tickets because it’s UGA AND the players?
        Perhaps a better way of explaining my point is to look at the team over time. If the players leave, do you still support the team? If the answer is yea, than the front of the jersey means more than the back. That doesn’t take away that the players are extremely important to the front, it just isn’t a one thing or the other.

        Like

        • Gaskilldawg

          I bought because I wanted to support the team. The star power of ghe player was the measure the UGA AA used to reward Don Leeburn and to reward me for our contributions.

          I could not, when buying a ticket, pay extra to sit with the AllAmerica. Don Leeburn paid the same for his ticket as I sid.

          My point is that UGA AA determined that the stat QB had more value to Don Leeburn’s table than the backup snapper did. If the UGA AA thought the name on the front of the jersey was all that counted then Leeburn’s table would have gotten to know the nice 5′ 9″ inside linebacker walk on. GIA made sure it did not happen because some players were worth more than othets.

          Like

          • Junkyardawg41

            If your point is that UGAAA has placed value on the players, I totally agree. Just like tickets inside the stadium. UGAAA has determined some seats are more valuable than others.

            Like

  11. NoAxeToGrind

    As to the first question: NO.

    Like

  12. Macallanlover

    No problem with this event at all. Clearly within the rules, very important, and the platform provided by the university gets an assist. UGA benefited from their efforts, and was rewarded, the athletes now get their payback. They took advantage of the opportunity provided and should get the dollars they earned. But don’t think that if they were the very best to ever play at Texas, ohio, Miami, etc., not one of those people attending would have shown up, even if it were free.

    Like

  13. UGA '97

    I like this and would have attended last year, but after an 8-5 season, may have spent a little less on the T-shirt. But look the kids also did something good for Battery Park and brought traffic in there which includes parking fees, food drink, merchandise and more foot traffic for the restaurants and bars, and UGA gets a brand bump. This is just a small sample of some of the good ways that can help the kids, and college athletes deserve a chance to find out their value and earn from that, off the field. Perhaps they could contribute a portion of all proceeds to a charity of their choice. If it starts to spiral out of hand then just reel it in, dial it back correct & improve. It ain’t gonna hurt us armchair quarterbacks…no one is forcing us to attend or pay.

    Like

  14. Al Ford

    It’s the rule of law they’ve already agreed to… go do something to replace the current system and stop bitching. Your words aren’t changing anything. Take action.

    Like

  15. Senator,
    If those five players had played at West Georgia 95% of your readers would have ever heard of them and none of them would have the opportunity to be drafted on the first day of the draft much less the first few rounds. So in that scenario Thursday night doesn’t even happen. Those are just simple facts.
    As for your hypothetical questions:
    “should the five have had to share what they received with the school?”
    They should and the rest of the team as well.
    “And, hypothetically speaking, had this event been put on a year ago and the five paid for it then, would that have ruined last season for you?”
    If this event was allowed to have happened last year or any year for other seniors or those that gave up their eligibility no. If it were for those that are left yes.

    Like

  16. ugafidelis

    I don’t think they should be paid a salary per se, but I don’t they should ever have to go without. Whether it be food, clothing, transportation, or other basic necessities, they should be well taken care of. I liked the idea of the lifetime scholarship I read here the other day. For those that don’t finish like Roquan and his quote below, or even those that wash out for other reasons, they’ve got however much time is left on their degree to come back and use it when they’re ready. Also, a medical insurance type system should be set up for “service connected disabilities.” I think they should be compensated for the profit of their likeness but not until they get out of school. Maybe in the form of post-tax income lump sum, or a 401k type account or something like that they can cash in after they graduate.

    I am not a sports fan. I’m not a college sports fan. I am a UGA sports fan. I wouldn’t turn on a Florida vs FSU basketball game to because just to watch a Magic or a Jordan play. I wouldn’t turn to a AU vs UA game to just watch Bo Jackson play. But I’ll damn sure turn on a UGA game to watch the Bulldogs play. College sports is what it is because to most teams’ loyal fans, whether they are alumni or not it IS the name on the front of the jersey that matters. We love these kids because they chose that name on the front of the jersey over all the rest out there. Our kids chose to join Dawg Nation; to wear the Red and Black. Whether they chose that name because it mattered to THEM their whole lives growing up, or they chose it because it was the best name to set themselves up for future success, they chose it. They chose to join our family. They chose our name because they felt it was the right place to be.

    It sounds like there is already some stuff in the courts to get better deals on behalf of the players, and I hope some good for them can come out of it.

    But I think if college sports become a mini NFL, then the big time sports will eventually wither and die. I also think that if it does go to two leagues like a true “student athlete” NCAA and an NFL Farm League, the college ball will be wildly more popular of the two.

    Like

  17. Hogbody Spradlin

    Oy gevalt! As long as The University of Georgia gets $41 million in a year for broadcasting it’s football games, and as long as our savior Kirby Smart makes multi millions per year to coach, it’s grossly hypocritical to prevent the Jake Fromms and especially the Todd Gurleys of the world from making a little money from their star value.

    Liked by 1 person

    • ugafidelis

      Did you even read my first paragraph?

      Like

      • Hogbody Spradlin

        Nah. Just going for drama. Relax.

        Like

      • Gaskilldawg

        I read it and I thought you wrote that Todd Gurley should not have been able to collect his fees for autographs when he needed the money as a college player but instead should get it after he became a highly paid professional.

        Paraphrasing you: “Todd, defer your profit from likeness when you are cash poor and get the relative chump change when you are a millionaire.” That is one of the things I read in your first paragraph.

        My view is that Todd should have been able to generate cash during the period he had no salary but all the Nike tee shirts he could ever want. Otherwise, Mama could have paid that power bill with athletic shoes.

        Like

  18. Tony Barnhart- Mr! CFB

    You need to get over the butthurt on this topic.

    Like