- Thread starter
- #21
Yo Tee
Well-Known Member
Triggered poster is triggered.
Sarcastic person doesn't get sarcasm.
Triggered poster is triggered.
LOL...Read my custom title and don't jump off any bridges.Sarcastic person doesn't get sarcasm.
LOL...Read my custom title and don't jump off any bridges.
This sounds similar to what Bobby Knight once said. He said something to the effect that when he needed to learn some more basketball, he'd go to some backwoods little shool in Indiana where a coach had to play with what he had and get the most out of 'em. They knew basketball...not how to coach the already talented/developed.The greatest x & o guys are there ones at great High School programs. (Public schools) They win by knowing the game nd ting the most out of every athlete they have. Those are special kinda guys.
I think we have fun with the first question, so, here's another!
Would You Rather....
Allow college athletes to be able to capitalize on their brands by having free market capabilities?
Or
Make college athletes employees and give them salaries?
I think we have fun with the first question, so, here's another!
Would You Rather....
Allow college athletes to be able to capitalize on their brands by having free market capabilities?
Or
Make college athletes employees and give them salaries?
The second option is not realistic. It's a gigantic shitstorm waiting to happen.
The first option is common sense. Don't know why it isn't allowed.
.1 - Will never happen. Can you imagine the boosters that would line up to buy 7000 Jerseys with Mr. 5*'s name on the back at $50.00 a pop. If the athlete only got 10% of the sale, that's $35K in their pocket from one booster. Take that times a few boosters and it would allow any school with big money donors to bid for services. I know that currently happens, but this would just legitimize it.
2 - Gigantic shit storm x 2. Among other things, imagine if OSHA got involved.
.
The questions isn't whether these two will happen or not, the questions is which one would you rather have happen. Both are unrealistic, I think any college sports fan knows that, but that's the point of the game.
I think we have fun with the first question, so, here's another!
Would You Rather....
Allow college athletes to be able to capitalize on their brands by having free market capabilities?
Or
Make college athletes employees and give them salaries?
This sounds similar to what Bobby Knight once said. He said something to the effect that when he needed to learn some more basketball, he'd go to some backwoods little shool in Indiana where a coach had to play with what he had and get the most out of 'em. They knew basketball...not how to coach the already talented/developed.
These are great.One was..."If you want to have money in your pocket at the end of the week, live
the first two days after you get your paycheck, the same way you did the last two days
before you got your paycheck." The other one my late Momma told me..."Never shop at the
Grocery Store when you are hungry." Good Heavens ws that a true statement. I've broken
that rule from time to time and have returned home with 50 more dollars worth of food
that will go bad before I can ever get to it.
These are great.
I was actually at that one. (I've sat through some real ass whippings.) That game was crazy. Dropped something like 9 in coverage...clock just ran and even if they finally found an open receiver, when they got close to the end zone the field was too small.Anyway, FWIW, Your win over BYU in 1985, in my book, was the greatest upset in CFB
I wouldn't have a problem with the first option, were it not so simple to create a work around end use it as a means of simply paying a kid to come to your school.I think we have fun with the first question, so, here's another!
Would You Rather....
Allow college athletes to be able to capitalize on their brands by having free market capabilities?
Or
Make college athletes employees and give them salaries?
Given the first coach probably makes a few million more than the second, I say option 1.