Verified Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

69 Sterling

About AuburnArch13

  • Rank
    Tenured Professor

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

1,302 profile views
  1. Do we know yet if Jalen Green and/or Cam Thomas ended up making it in this weekend for the Ring Ceremony/ Copper commitment/ Miss St game?
  2. Looking at the box score this morning it looks like neither Dunbar nor Brown ended up getting any minutes last night. Not sure exactly what conclusions to draw from that, but it doesn’t seem ideal.
  3. Loof, I’ll preface this by saying that I think that we agree about more than we disagree in general and in this discussion. Specifically, I think we both find the fetishism of “amateurism” that many folks around here seem to have to be odd. Also, I think we both take to heart the idea that these kids should be able to use their talents to their own benefits in as unencumbered of a manner as possible. With that said I do bristle a little bit when I hear the accusation that the NCAA or member institutions are making massive ‘profits’ off of the student athletes. It is certainly true that they generate quite a bit of revenue, but that isn’t the same thing. The NCAA and its constituents are non-profit organizations after all. That may seem like a pedantic distinction but I think it is an important thing to remember in this discussion that the excess revenue that the NCAA generates does go back to supporting the student athletes. It’s not as if there is some cabal of greedy shareholders that are squeezing these kids for every last dime. Sure there are paid employees at the NCAA, some of whom make quite nice salaries, but administration costs as a whole tally less than 5% of total revenue, with salaries being only a part of that. That’s quite efficient all things considered, and supports the idea that even the largest salaries there are probably money well spent. As for the revenue itself, I think it’s important to talk about that in context. Last year, the NCAA brought in about a billion dollars in revenue. It’s a big number for sure, but it starts to look smaller when you consider that there are 460,000 student athletes that fall under the NCAA umbrella. So per capita, each student is bringing in just under $2,200 in revenue to the NCAA. That’s not all that surprising when you consider that most of the revenue is generated by only a small portion of the athletes in football and men’s and women’s basketball. But in a way, that’s kind of the point, that even if some how you were able to run the NCAA cost free, and return all of the revenue back to the students you’d be be forced to choose between giving a relative modest (though not negligible) amount of money to everyone, or be faced with having to further prioritize the few revenue generating sports. I think it’s also important to consider where that billion dollars does go currently. Right now, about half of it goes back into hard costs, funding the tournaments, propping up non-revenue generating sports and revenue generating sports and non-revenue generating school, legal and consulting fees, etc. about 5% goes back into admin, as previously discussed, and the other ~45% does go back to the students in targeted ways such as scholarships, grants, insurance, and other programs. To me, that seems like probably a good idea. If your only talking about having about $1,000 to spend per student at that point, setting up a way to target that money toward the students that need it the most makes more sense than trying to create some athlete salary system with it. After saying all this, I’ll acknowledge that I do realize that a lot of your beef with the NCAA comes not from the fact that they aren’t paying students salaries, but from the rules they create that don’t allow students to make money for themselves. I’ve got some issues there myself, and while it’d be fun to flesh out where we might agree and disagree there, that would make this an even longer post than it is. So maybe that becomes another post for tomorrow’s lunch break.
  4. Sure, but can you really go after the NCAA for that? If there is a villain to be had in those instances, I’d argued that it’s the NFL and NBA whose ownerships benefit from the smaller payrolls that having an outside “farm league” creates. And personally, I do think that the NBA and particularly the NFL are taking advantage of these kids greatly through their anti-competitive practices. But I’m not sure where this is the NCAA’s responsibility, or even in their capacity, to fix.
  5. As hesitant as I am to tip-toe into the maw here, I think some of the resistance that folks in general have to the CEO salaries of large corporations, while certainly understandable, doesn’t always make the most sense. When you compare Emmert’s salary to the salaries of CEOs of organizations with comparable revenue, I think you’d find it to be substantially less. I’m not going to argue that he’s missing meals, but I believe the NCAA, like any other large non-profit has the responsibility to do what it needs to in order to attract the best talent to grow and manage its revenue. I’ll remain agnostic as to whether Emmert should be considered “the best talent”. I don’t know that much about him. But the NCAA, for all its faults, seems to do a very good job of supporting its member programs, the majority of which are non-revenue generating. If that is the primary goal of the NCAA, then I think it’s hard to say that they aren’t accomplishing their mission. I’m not sure they would be able to do that nearly as effectively with a CEO making even in the 6 figure range. And as always, one can certainly dispute what the NCAA mission should be, but then that’s another conversation.
  6. He visited Kansas this last weekend. Said after the visit he still wants to visit Iowa St. before he decides. Assuming that’s true, I’d imagine the earliest we’d know is early next week if he were to take his visit this weekend. I don’t think that he’s set a date for it yet though.
  7. He’s said he’ll probably decide right after his Kansas visit (May 10-12). He wants to know where he’s going before the NBA draft, in case he doesn’t get drafted. It’s not 100% that he announces pre-draft as far as I can tell, but it sounds like he’ll at least let the teams know.
  8. True, true. But we did get those twitter rumblings last week. I took those to mean that things are at least theoretically on track for him to reclassify, but that we might not hear more than rumblings until it was a done deal. That’s speculation on my part for sure, but thats nonetheless the impression that I got.
  9. I’m not sure on this, but the sense that I’ve gotten is that there may be some summer classes he’d need to take, and it’s possible he’d finish after the actual school year. Anyone who has better information on this, feel free to correct me.
  10. Good for him. Really hope it works out for him.
  11. Would imagine we’d know soonish. I believe today was the first day of the second, roughly month long, signing period.
  12. Hiring an agent doesn’t cost him his eligibility. Starting with last year’s draft, players can get an agent to help them through the draft preparation process after their season ends, provided the relationship is documented and submitted to the NCAA. There are restrictions on financial compensation that the player can receive from their agent (essentially they are allowed to pay for travel, food, lodging and things like that). They must also terminate the relationship with the agent if and when they decide to return to school during the 10 day period after the draft. With that said, Harper should definitely look into getting an agent. He can still get a contract from a team, even if he does go undrafted, but that will be a more uncertain process for which a good agent would be invaluable.,amp.html
  13. I agree that we certainly can’t count on him being back next year. But with what we just saw with Eli Stove and Will Hastings, I’m not sure we can rule it out either. They both went from surgery to playing in games in ~6 months, which was damn near unheard of. It’s possible that they were both medical marvels, but it’s also possible that the new stem-cell/ plasma infusion therapy that they received is actually just a game changer in how we should think about ACL recoveries. It’s absolutely not a given or even close to that that Chuma will be ready to go next year, but a ~9 month recovery, which would get him back around the start of conference play, doesn’t seem impossible.
  14. Under the new rules, he could also go through the entire draft process including the draft itself, and still come back to school in the case that he wasn’t drafted. This would help mitigate what had been the biggest downside risk in years past of going through the draft (i.e. not being drafted or allowed to return to school). As far as I see it the biggest downside risk now for him going to the draft this year would be getting drafted late in the second by a team that only wants to give him a one year deal or deal with a team option for year two. This would be put him in a potential pickle if he suffers any sort of setback in his recovery and then gets drafted over next season. But even in that scenario, he’d be getting paid what is likely a life changing amount of money for him and his family for that year. For context, only one second round pick from last year’s draft signed a deal worth less than $1mil guaranteed for the first year. The more I think about the new rules the more inclined I am to say that Chuma should go a ahead and try to go pro this year. This is especially true if the early recovery prognosis suggests that he’ll likely miss next season entirely. It’s hard to improve your draft stock if you aren’t able to play.