Brian Kelly speaks out against buying players.

Donate To GopherHole
RememberMurray said:
I have to say, the pearl-clutching is hilarious.

Nobody seemed to be demanding "rules" until the athletes themselves stood to make a little money.

Coaches, TV executives, colleges... they can all make money hand over fist, and nobody says boo.

Too funny.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? There were always rules until recently in all organized sports.

It's like you're saying we don't need laws in society. Society, as you know, is chaos without laws.

All most people are asking for is some sort of regulation and rules on paying and transferring. In the end it will benefit everyone, not just the top 25%.
 

RememberMurray said:
I have to say, the pearl-clutching is hilarious.

Nobody seemed to be demanding "rules" until the athletes themselves stood to make a little money.

Coaches, TV executives, colleges... they can all make money hand over fist, and nobody says boo.

Too funny.
Click to expand...

Murray - I think the point is this:

NIL was created for players to benefit off their Name, Image and Likeness. So that Joe QB could sell his own T-shirts, posters, do commercials, sign autographs for $$ and so forth. that was the intent of the legislation in California that got all of this going. I don't think anyone objects to that.

the issue is that the boosters and collectives stepped in and suddenly players are receiving 6-figure or even 7-figure offers that really have nothing to do with Name, Image or Likeness. It's pay for play, and that was never the intent of the original legislation.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Murray - I think the point is this:

NIL was created for players to benefit off their Name, Image and Likeness. So that Joe QB could sell his own T-shirts, posters, do commercials, sign autographs for $$ and so forth. that was the intent of the legislation in California that got all of this going. I don't think anyone objects to that.

the issue is that the boosters and collectives stepped in and suddenly players are receiving 6-figure or even 7-figure offers that really have nothing to do with Name, Image or Likeness. It's pay for play, and that was never the intent of the original legislation.
Click to expand...

Regarding pay for play: Why is it okay for certain people to profit from college football, but not okay for the players to get paid?

Nobody here has answered that particular question.
 

Brian Kelly, Saban, ESPN three things that caused/causing low interest in college football. :poop: come in three.
 

RememberMurray said:
Regarding pay for play: Why is it okay for certain people to profit from college football, but not okay for the players to get paid?

Nobody here has answered that particular question.
Click to expand...
I think it has been answered, multiple times. I don't think anyone is saying it's not ok for the players to get paid. It's the "how" that matters.
 



RememberMurray said:
Regarding pay for play: Why is it okay for certain people to profit from college football, but not okay for the players to get paid?

Nobody here has answered that particular question.
Click to expand...
Good lord man....that question has been answered.....multiple times by multiple people.

So instead of doing it again, I will ask you this instead. Do you think the current system is good for college football and basketball? Unrestricted free agency, players going to 3-4 schools, pay for play money going to recruits and being used to poach players off of rosters regardless of whether they are in the portal or not, constant lawsuits.....
 

MNVCGUY said:
Good lord man....that question has been answered.....multiple times by multiple people.

So instead of doing it again, I will ask you this instead. Do you think the current system is good for college football and basketball? Unrestricted free agency, players going to 3-4 schools, pay for play money going to recruits and being used to poach players off of rosters regardless of whether they are in the portal or not, constant lawsuits.....
Click to expand...

'Good Lord, man'... do you hate the free market?

How can the free market be bad for anything?
 

RememberMurray said:
'Good Lord, man'... do you hate the free market?

How can the free market be bad for anything?
Click to expand...
well I tried.....guess you are one of the few out there that likes the current state of things....
 



RememberMurray said:
THANK YOU!!!!!

Coaches like Kelly and Saban, who have made obscene amounts of money for years coaching these kids, are suddenly getting their knickers in a twist because the athletes finally — finally! — have an opportunity to get just a piece of this very, very large money pie that is college football.

Please. Give me a break.
Click to expand...
Sure nice and convenient of you to put words in someone else's mouth.

I get that some people on here, especially ones that don't watch much, or any, SEC football, don't like Saban. But you can't just make up stuff to match the narrative you want.

Saban was disgusted, but it's not because the players got paid. It's because they weren't acting like a cohesive team anymore. They were one play away from playing for the NC, lost that play and the game, and they didn't really care. Why? Because now they are paid mercenaries who just go around to the highest bidder.

I think most would agree that players moving around a lot doesn't do much for loyalty to the school, team, etc. Whereas you would tend to care more about a loss if you were with the same core group of guys for 4 years.

That's what he was talking about, fyi.
 

RememberMurray said:
'Good Lord, man'... do you hate the free market?

How can the free market be bad for anything?
Click to expand...
The free market still has rails of what's legal and not. But, as others have said, probably hitting my head against the wall with you.
 

RememberMurray said:
But now many people seem to have become very, very concerned when the athletes themselves — the people we all love to watch perform — are getting an opportunity to have a share in the financial bonanza that is college football. They seem to see this new development as some sort of existential threat to their beloved Big Show, for some reason.
Click to expand...
The problem they have is the players leaving and moving all around with no more "team" concept. Them getting money is fine. Go back to only transferring as a grad transfer and you'd hear a lot less complaining, if any at all.
 

RememberMurray said:
Nobody seemed to be demanding "rules" until the athletes themselves stood to make a little money.
Click to expand...
That's because we HAD rules.

But go ahead and ignore all the other posters pointing out the flaws in your posts and keep spewing the same crap - message boards love it!
 



MNVCGUY said:
well I tried.....guess you are one of the few out there that likes the current state of things....
Click to expand...
He's just acting like @MplsGopher now - take a position, stick with it no matter what, and then ask tangential questions when challenged on anything, while ignoring all of the good points made from the other side of the argument.

Speaking of that, we haven't seen any posting from good ol' @MplsGopher recently but ol' Murray here is lighting up the thread in a similar fashion. I wonder if someone forgot which account they were logged in as....
 

I asked a very simple question. The only answer I received was some nonsense about how it had already been answered.

People love the free market, as long as it works to their advantage. When it becomes inconvenient, they want to limit it.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
He's just acting like @MplsGopher now - take a position, stick with it no matter what, and then ask tangential questions when challenged on anything, while ignoring all of the good points made from the other side of the argument.

Speaking of that, we haven't seen any posting from good ol' @MplsGopher recently but ol' Murray here is lighting up the thread in a similar fashion. I wonder if someone forgot which account they were logged in as....
Click to expand...

I must say, you seem to react very strongly to having your viewpoint questioned.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
I think most would agree that players moving around a lot doesn't do much for loyalty to the school, team, etc. Whereas you would tend to care more about a loss if you were with the same core group of guys for 4 years.

That's what he was talking about, fyi.
Click to expand...

How do you feel about coaches moving around from team to team? How does that impact "loyalty to the school, team, etc."?
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Murray - I think the point is this:

NIL was created for players to benefit off their Name, Image and Likeness. So that Joe QB could sell his own T-shirts, posters, do commercials, sign autographs for $$ and so forth. that was the intent of the legislation in California that got all of this going. I don't think anyone objects to that.

the issue is that the boosters and collectives stepped in and suddenly players are receiving 6-figure or even 7-figure offers that really have nothing to do with Name, Image or Likeness. It's pay for play, and that was never the intent of the original legislation.
Click to expand...
I still don't understand why people care about this distinction. If some crazy rich guy wants to pay a kid to play for his favorite team, it shouldn't be restricted just because some people think that is "too much".
 

60's Guy said:
Individual players getting paid is cool. Some individual players getting $500,000 or $1,000,000 or
$2,000,000 to play a college sport is too much too fast. There needs to be some structure so everybody gets paid. One guy can't make millions and his teammate in the same locker room gets nothing. Or one school pays millions to players but the schools they play don't have millions to spend and therefore are at a distinct disadvantage. It's out of whack...the spending needs to be regulated so people can go back to cheating.
Click to expand...
So where's the line on what is "too much too fast"? And who gets to decide that? Why should everybody get paid?

I'm sure glad there are no artificial rules that stop me for getting paid for my abilities in my line of work.
 

RememberMurray said:
I asked a very simple question. The only answer I received was some nonsense about how it had already been answered.

People love the free market, as long as it works to their advantage. When it becomes inconvenient, they want to limit it.
Click to expand...
RM may be a pain in the butt poster, but this line is dead on.
 

GopherTheJugular said:
He's just acting like @MplsGopher now - take a position, stick with it no matter what, and then ask tangential questions when challenged on anything, while ignoring all of the good points made from the other side of the argument.

Speaking of that, we haven't seen any posting from good ol' @MplsGopher recently but ol' Murray here is lighting up the thread in a similar fashion. I wonder if someone forgot which account they were logged in as....
Click to expand...
Careful....if you say his name too many times he will appear....
 


MNVCGUY said:
Some will discount this because it is coming from Brian Kelly the same way people scoffed at what Saban had to say. But I like that more and more coaches are speaking out about the insanity of what is going on right now.

sports.yahoo.com

LSU coach Brian Kelly: 'We're not in the market of buying players'

Kelly said LSU hasn't "fared very well" in its attempts to add transfer defensive linemen.
sports.yahoo.com sports.yahoo.com
Click to expand...

I get your point, but he just doesn't like that what he was doing under the table is now being neutralized. That guy is a fraud.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Yes and No. What is going on right now still isn't technically legal. They are calling it NIL but most of what is going on in basketball is straight up pay for play and it is happening in football as well. The playing field is still not even and the helmet schools are still in position to get the top players, maybe they have a little more competition but on the football side the top talent is still going primarily to a handful of schools.

And I get why people immediately discount anything that is said by these helmet school head coaches and that is a real shame. Because the stupidity and unsustainability of this current system needs to be called out by as many coaches as possible.

What is going on in college basketball and college football is horrible for the sports. And this isn't about not wanting the players to get paid. The current system is a complete and total mess for everyone involved. Sure some players are profiting from it but it is tearing down everything that used to make college sports special.
Click to expand...
We aren't discounting the message, we are discounting the messenger. Give me a coach with a reputation for not being shady AF from a big school saying it and I will applaud. Saban and Kelly can pound sand.

Do you really think Coach Cal laments it on the basketball side? Of course not he just laments that he couldn't use the cash he gave the players to show up and keep them away from others. Same with these guys.

Two things can be true:

1) the system is a joke and needs fixing bad

2) these guys only want it fixed so they can get their cheating advantage back
 

RememberMurray said:
I have to say, the pearl-clutching is hilarious.

Nobody seemed to be demanding "rules" until the athletes themselves stood to make a little money.

Coaches, TV executives, colleges... they can all make money hand over fist, and nobody says boo.

Too funny.
Click to expand...
You are so full of it. The problem isn't athletes getting paid, the problem is that there is no mechanism by which to stop them from leaving on a whim. At least with coaches there is a buyout.

You are making up an argument no one is having because you want to prove a point no one is arguing. Maybe that makes you feel smart like you won, but to everyone else we are wonder WTAF you are talking about.

Unregulated free agency is unsustainable no matter who it is.
 

RememberMurray said:
Regarding pay for play: Why is it okay for certain people to profit from college football, but not okay for the players to get paid?

Nobody here has answered that particular question.
Click to expand...
No. But again what does that have to do with anything?

Who here is saying the players should not be paid. And dont say Brian Kelly because you know I mean the posters. No one is advocating for the players not to make money. You are just making up crap because you have nothing of value to say and everyone recognized it and rightly pointed at you and laughed.

You know you and I agree on a lot, but your trolling tactics make you no more tolerable than MPLS_Gopher. Go outside, make a new friend, read a book...do anything because your spam trolling in numerous threads is friggin tiresome.
 

Dave H said:
No. But again what does that have to do with anything?

Who here is saying the players should not be paid. And dont say Brian Kelly because you know I mean the posters. No one is advocating for the players not to make money. You are just making up crap because you have nothing of value to say and everyone recognized it and rightly pointed at you and laughed.

You know you and I agree on a lot, but your trolling tactics make you no more tolerable than MPLS_Gopher. Go outside, make a new friend, read a book...do anything because your spam trolling in numerous threads is friggin tiresome.
Click to expand...
I mean nobody in this thread has outright said players shouldn't be paid, but people have said "I don't like the way they're being paid", or "they should get paid but not too much", which are basically roundabout ways of wanting to limit players' ability to capitalize on their talents.
 

Gophers1992 said:
I still don't understand why people care about this distinction. If some crazy rich guy wants to pay a kid to play for his favorite team, it shouldn't be restricted just because some people think that is "too much".
Click to expand...
I think people in general (not saying me) would have less issue with it if the players weren't on scholarship or if they were under contract to the school. Why should the university have to waste money on a player that is making much larger amounts anyways in the form of an athletic scholarship? Why should they fund their housing and such?

(I can poke a lot of wholes in that argument but I think that hangs up a lot of people)

As for the free market, professional athletes in the US are protected by unions. Those unions regulate contracts. That doesn't seem to get in the way of the players getting what they deserve. Also, as an employee at a university myself, I am also covered by a union contract. Right now college athletes are getting their cake and eating it to but we all know that wont last. Sooner or later they will choose to sacrifice their freedoms for certain protections. Until then they have every right to cash in and probably should. Doesn't make the product watchable though.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom