Is joining a conference the same thing as socialism?

[Irish7478]

Well if you relate a conference to an entire country I guess, but that's a pretty terrible comparison. If anything, the football programs are akin to powerful corporations or govt branches who actually have influence and the 'people' are the fans/players. I'm not exactly sure what your point is besides trolling or a 'gotcha see you conservatives like socialism because they like sports' type of point



As for this...um so what? Some people liked communism too. Some people enjoy being in North Korea.

I agree with you. Some people like communism, many like socialism. The transfer of wealth between the "haves" and "have nots" is not necessarily a bad thing. It's just that many people hate the idea that it's something they support. It's easier to just say, "well, that's not the same thing", even though it is.

 

[olympicoscar]

Business partners that agree to split all the profit, likely did not put in exactly the same input. But if they voluntarily agreed to it, then no problem. Same with joining a conference.

 

[Irish7478]

Business partners that agree to split all the profit, likely did not put in exactly the same input. But if they voluntarily agreed to it, then no problem. Same with joining a conference.

I never said it was a bad thing, I said it was socialism. It's other people trying to explain why this transfer of wealth is a good thing while other transfers of wealth is a bad thing.

 

[DragonfromTO]

My definition would be : Taking money from the "haves" to prop up the "have nots" who can't generate the money on their own. And yes the "haves" agree to stay there, but this transfer of wealth seems to fit my definition of socialism. Some here seem to imply that just because someone could leave the conference means it isn't socialism. There are a lot of people who live in socialistic societies who like the security of being there, and ont want to leave.

Forget about "leaving", they don't have to join in the first place

 

[NDHoosier101]

It is socialism, but you can't blame them, making it on your own is hard. Ask BYU, Penn St or any school that has attempted it. Aside from ND of course, further proof they're America's team.

 

[DragonfromTO]

I agree with you. Some people like communism, many like socialism. The transfer of wealth between the "haves" and "have nots" is not necessarily a bad thing. It's just that many people hate the idea that it's something they support. It's easier to just say, "well, that's not the same thing", even though it is.

I don't object to "the transfer of wealth between the 'haves' and 'have nots'". I voluntarily "transfer" plenty to charity. I merely object to the use of force to achieve that end.

 

[Irish7478]

Forget about "leaving", they don't have to join in the first place

There are many people saying teams should be forced to join a conference, even if they don't want to. Some conferences have raised the cost of leaving so its almost impossible to leave.

 

[DragonfromTO]

There are many people saying teams should be forced to join a conference, even if they don't want to. Some conferences have raised the cost of leaving so its almost impossible to leave.

There are many people saying all kinds of stupid shit. Why does that matter?

 

[Irish7478]

There are many people saying all kinds of stupid shit. Why does that matter?

That's the basis of this forum. Some people say stupid things, some disagree, others support.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Everyone gets to split the bowl money, even if you havents been to a bowl in years. Everyone gets to split the TV money, even if you're in a small market that generates almost no viewership. The "haves" get screwed while the "have nots" survive on the funding provided by the haves. It seems like this is how socialism works. Yet many Americans seem happy to let this practise continue.

Heck, the NFL is the very idea of socialism incarnated. Revenues split across all teams and the worst team one season gets the first pick in the draft and the best gets the last in the first round. As a result you can have very successful teams in very small markets, i.e. Green Bay. The reverse is true for the MLB, whereby the big market teams (like the Yankees) keep all their own revenues, and can have payrolls hundreds of times larger than the small market teams. Hence why they Yankees have been to the playoffs many more times than the Royals. And this in no small part is part of the reason by the NFL surpassed the MLB as the highest revenue sport. With of course other notable factors such as the change of media from radio/newspaper (which is better set up for baseball) to TV (which is better set up for football).

 

[Irish7478]

Heck, the NFL is the very idea of socialism incarnated. Revenues split across all teams and the worst team one season gets the first pick in the draft and the best gets the last in the first round. As a result you can have very successful teams in very small markets, i.e. Green Bay. The reverse is true for the MLB, whereby the big market teams (like the Yankees) keep all their own revenues, and can have payrolls hundreds of times larger than the small market teams. Hence why they Yankees have been to the playoffs many more times than the Royals. And this in no small part is part of the reason by the NFL surpassed the MLB as the highest revenue sport. With of course other notable factors such as the change of media from radio/newspaper (which is better set up for baseball) to TV (which is better set up for football).

So, what you're saying is

NFL= socialism
MLB= capitalism

?

 

[TBBishop]

Don't try to justify your favorite program's cowardice!!!

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

So, what you're saying is

NFL= socialism
MLB= capitalism

?

More or less

 

[DragonfromTO]

That's the basis of this forum. Some people say stupid things, some disagree, others support.

Who is saying that in this forum? Forget about "many people", I haven't even seen one. And I definitely know that I haven't. So why would/should I have to defend such a position?

 

[Irish7478]

Who is saying that in this forum? Forget about "many people", I haven't even seen one. And I definitely know that I haven't. So why would/should I have to defend such a position?

I'm saying that the "politics forum" is based on people making statements. Some people agree, some people disagree, sometimes strongly. How many times have you seen someone on this board say another person is full of shit. Sometimes posters disagree, that was the point I was making. Maybe you disagree.

 

[Irish7478]

Don't try to justify your favorite program's cowardice!!!

So do you think ND should join a conference? If so, which one.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

So do you think ND should join a conference? If so, which one.

The one that makes the most sense, geographically, academically, culturally, and historically, the Big Ten!

 

[Irish7478]

The one that makes the most sense, geographically, academically, culturally, and historically, the Big Ten!

Jim Delaney has stated that ND has not been invited.

 

[TBBishop]

So do you think ND should join a conference? If so, which one.

They should be in the Big Ten. They should have come in with Penn State. Even though I love the Nebraska addition they should have come in instead of Nebraska. They should have come in instead of Rutgers or Maryland. They should come in with whomever the 16th team in the conference is. Hell they could replace Purdue for all I care but they need to get in where they fit in and that is definately not the ACC.

 

[GoBlueNavyNuke]

Jim Delaney has stated that ND has not been invited.

Do honestly think if Notre Dame approached Delaney stating they would like to join the Big Ten that he would say no?