1. Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

California just voted in favor of killing off the PAC-12

Discussion in 'College Football Forum' started by AlaskaGuy, Sep 9, 2019.

  1. ralphiewvu

    ralphiewvu Well-Known Member

    14,948
    1,966
    173
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Central PA
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 3,500


    It doesn’t matter if anyone in the state watches them, as long as the cable/satellite provider can still charge them which they obviously will it doesn’t make one iota of a difference if anyone in the state of California ever watches.

    You aren’t really that dumb, are you?
     



    • Like Like x 1
  2. TigerBait1971

    TigerBait1971 FUK DEM! DATS RITE!

    38,764
    2,912
    293
    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Location:
    PTC, Georgia
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 600


    Anybody advocating for this either is clueless or hates college sports.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. AlaskaGuy

    AlaskaGuy Throbbing Member

    54,550
    16,396
    1,033
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2016
    Location:
    Big Lake, Alaska
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 499


    This ^^
     
  4. ralphiewvu

    ralphiewvu Well-Known Member

    14,948
    1,966
    173
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Central PA
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 3,500


    Well said you handsome devil :eyebrows:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431


    Right, because the cable/satellite company is charging the advertisers on CBS/ABC/FOX...

    You aren't really that dumb, are you?
     
  6. AlaskaGuy

    AlaskaGuy Throbbing Member

    54,550
    16,396
    1,033
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2016
    Location:
    Big Lake, Alaska
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 499

  7. ralphiewvu

    ralphiewvu Well-Known Member

    14,948
    1,966
    173
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Central PA
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 3,500


    You stated NCAA viewership numbers. I stated it doesn’t matter if anyone in California watches because people are still getting charged for it. You don’t know the difference?

    You aren’t really this dumb, are you?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431


    Who's getting charged for ABC/CBS/FOX? They are free over the air.

    You aren't really this dumb, are you?
     
  9. AlaskaGuy

    AlaskaGuy Throbbing Member

    54,550
    16,396
    1,033
    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2016
    Location:
    Big Lake, Alaska
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 499


    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. ralphiewvu

    ralphiewvu Well-Known Member

    14,948
    1,966
    173
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Central PA
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 3,500


    Are you under some impression every television in America comes instantly with ABC/CBS/FOX without needing a service provider? Just like you think every corporate sponsorship for each university hinges on the viewers in California?

    You aren’t really this dumb, are you?
     
  11. wazzu31

    wazzu31 I am probably drunk

    12,674
    2,357
    173
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Location:
    Sumner
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 1,000


    This is the main issue. Is it does not work around title IX, someone is getting compensated strictly because they are an athlete at an institution. Your likeness only means something if you are an athlete. Normal society doesn’t pay for your likeness, they go all Reggie Bush and pay for you to come straight to work for them.

    USC and Stanford being private alleviates the pressure such as bills that are passed banning public employees from non LGBTQ. So it’s a positive yet a negative in the same way but I don’t think that affects those two schools. Cal and UCLA it does and where this whole Pac 12 issue will stem from.

    The NCAA has been challenged several times, but this is where a ton of hatred is towards the NCAA especially on the politics board. People/uneducated voters are pissec off at the NCAA because they don’t understand that athletes can’t jump straight to the pros because of professional leagues. There are a ton of reasons to dislike the NCAA but because student athletes live ten times better than your average student who has a part time job on the side isn’t one of them. But this is where it gets complicated and I completely disagree with this bill because IMO it is ignorant as hell. I do believe athletes should get compensated for signatures, jersey sells etc. Big problem is, that it opens a Pandora’s box of alumni/fans being legally able to buy recruits because they get paid for being an athlete. Which I think you are saying USC wouldn’t while I completely disagree with Cal wouldn’t. That school has already tried dropping most of their sports because academics/athletics.

    I will concede your last part is how you feel. My big objection to this besides how I feel politically, is because a local rep here proposed the identical bill and I heard the arguments for and against it at a hearing they held at Central Washington before it went to a single committee and every single politician and pro the bill were ignorant as hell as to what athletics are and did not care/think about the ramifications of it. It was academics who already dislike sports because coaches make more money and fans who just say the kids deserve more money because they bring in money that don’t realize what an athletic departments budget it.

    The last part is a legit argument except the rebuttal is always well the athletes from non revenue sports can receive the same or later on down the line. I will fully disclose I am bias against shit like this because these bills are always just about feelings and the immediate instead of what the fallout will be and since I have girls who love sports I am highly against a bill like this or the trying of allowing transgendered females compete in women sports. So on surface I agree with the intent of the bill, but just like on the surface I’d agree with dropping an atomic bomb on the Middle East but then the fallout is why I’d object to it.
     
  12. wazzu31

    wazzu31 I am probably drunk

    12,674
    2,357
    173
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Location:
    Sumner
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 1,000


    Hmm, nearly every single high profiled case of the NCAA sanctioning schools say your statement is wrong. Let alone the FBI just busting schools for bribing kids. Which USC employee paid Reggie Bush’s family? Which SMU employee paid for all the players that cost them the death penalty. I will never understand how any person pro this type of bill is pro having college athletics at all. What is one reason if a player is allowed to make money off of his/her’s only reason for making money is because they are an exceptional athlete receive a scholarship or anything from a university? The NCAA isn’t the federal government but without the NCAA college athletics is the AAF.
     
  13. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431


    Neither of those had anything to do with title IX.
     
  14. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431


    Are you under some impression that you need a service provider to watch ABC/CBS/FOX?

    You aren't really this dumb, are you?
     
  15. wazzu31

    wazzu31 I am probably drunk

    12,674
    2,357
    173
    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Location:
    Sumner
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 1,000


    No they don’t. But it goes against your little faux argument. There are two arguments against and yours is false. It’s either the NCAA is the governing body which I and @trojanfan12 are having a disconnect on the outcome of the California schools not seceding from the NCAA. He feels one way, I disagree and feel different.

    Yours is idiotic as the other argument against the dumb bill is title IX which is a flat out fact if somehow a state can overrule the NCAA but a court battle will happen for that one and for the liberals in California/West Coast they are going to be at odds with their argument since the only argument is that Title IX is unconstitutional. As of right now any student affiliated with an academic instruction falls under Title IX. Have fun selling to a judge that DeVos is right with wanting to reform it.
     
  16. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431


    Your argument would hold water if the school was paying them. They aren't. Title IX doesn't apply; this is obvious and should be simple for you to understand.
     
  17. ralphiewvu

    ralphiewvu Well-Known Member

    14,948
    1,966
    173
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Location:
    Central PA
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 3,500


    So riddle me this ichibod, how do you watch them without a service provider? I’ll wait
     
  18. 7Samurai13

    7Samurai13 Funniest SH member

    26,744
    4,903
    293
    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 582


    The alternative must have been worse
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  19. trojanfan12

    trojanfan12 R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

    55,766
    12,376
    1,033
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2013
    Location:
    San Clemente, Ca.
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 12,959


    Which is why all athletes would have that ability. If it were exclusive to male athletes or football/basketball players, that would be an issue.

    Also, if a regular student who was on a music scholarship wrote a hit song, they would be free to collect any money from the song and from use of their likeness.
     
  20. michaeljordan_fan

    michaeljordan_fan Well-Known Member

    6,036
    650
    113
    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2013
    Hoopla Bookie:
    $ 2,431