It hits the fan tonight on HBO apparently

[kmoose]

That's not entirely true, as the law isn't clear. At least that is what the Ivy League commish on HBO said... and I'm assuming he knows his stuff.

Well, it certainly sounds like something that ought to be researched, fully, by the talking heads. If that is the way the law would be interpreted, by the courts, then we can just end the discussion of paying college athletes now.

 

[Rhode Irish]

Section 1681. Sex
(a) Prohibition against discrimination; exceptions. No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance

I would take the "benefits of" as saying that everyone should require the same compensation.

I actually think you are focusing on the wrong words here. I think the key words are on the basis of sex. It may not be the mainstream viewpoint, but I contend that you could make different rules for collegiate athletic programs that operate in the black (mainly BCS football and basketball programs and a few mid-major programs). The distinguishing feature, then, would be profitability, not gender. You would not be denying anyone anything on the basis of sex. So if a woman's program in some sport somehow operated in the black, they would be treated the same way.

As far as Whitlock, I'm not a huge fan but I don't think he is an idiot, either. He is clearly an intelligent guy. He is also frequently wrong and appears to enjoy playing the contrarian. But I think it is inaccurate to call him an idiot.

 

[military_irish]

I actually think you are focusing on the wrong words here. I think the key words are on the basis of sex. It may not be the mainstream viewpoint, but I contend that you could make different rules for collegiate athletic programs that operate in the black (mainly BCS football and basketball programs and a few mid-major programs). The distinguishing feature, then, would be profitability, not gender. You would not be denying anyone anything on the basis of sex. So if a woman's program in some sport somehow operated in the black, they would be treated the same way.

As far as Whitlock, I'm not a huge fan but I don't think he is an idiot, either. He is clearly an intelligent guy. He is also frequently wrong and appears to enjoy playing the contrarian. But I think it is inaccurate to call him an idiot.

I agree, but i don't know many women sports that are in the black more than the men. Maybe in the little known sports. But in soccer ND won the National Championship against Stanford both with bigger men followings in other sports. In basketball it is the same, although the women of ND may get more sales because of Skylar Diggins who is from South Bend. Even the UCONN women who dominate their sport receive less publicity than their men. It is a hard battle, but they are suppose to be viewed as on the same "level'. Although it may be wrong or right in some peoples view. They are suppose to viewed in the same light as the "most profitable" team, which in most cases is the male team. Not that I agree, just the facts.

 

[IrishLax]

As far as Whitlock, I'm not a huge fan but I don't think he is an idiot, either. He is clearly an intelligent guy. He is also frequently wrong and appears to enjoy playing the contrarian. But I think it is inaccurate to call him an idiot.

I would. My opinion on Whitlock started when crucified Notre Dame for firing Willingham with all kinds of half-truths and slander about it being a "race." Years later Miami fires Randy Shannon, another black coach "doing everything right" and he doesn't say a peep. Whitlock has also been accused of paying people to write articles for him and the like.

My opinion isn't worth much, but he's one of my top 2 least respected journalists with Jamele Hill. Both of them try to make everything about race and refuse to deal in facts.

 

[ThePiombino]

Going into last night I was pretty sure I wanted to dropkick that hack, Whitlock. After watching the show, I now KNOW I do.

 

[ThePiombino]

I would. My opinion on Whitlock started when crucified Notre Dame for firing Willingham with all kinds of half-truths and slander about it being a "race." Years later Miami fires Randy Shannon, another black coach "doing everything right" and he doesn't say a peep. Whitlock has also been accused of paying people to write articles for him and the like.

My opinion isn't worth much, but he's one of my top 2 least respected journalists with Jamele Hill. Both of them try to make everything about race and refuse to deal in facts.

Easy standby for when they have nothing of substance to say...which isn't often.

 

[FrankMA]

I think that in the end, if you tried to pay football players and not other athletes in other collegian sports, particularly women’s sports, it will end up in court and the women will win. Besides that, if you pay players only in sports that are in the black, the other sports cannot survive because the money from football and in some cases basketball pays for all the other sports at many schools. If the money that would normally go to these sports is instead paid to players of the major sports, these minor sports would fold and this would violate Title IX. Since most women’s sports would have to be cut or scaled back, this would constitute major a major violation of the existing law. Even if you managed to somehow survive the court battles over Title IX, I can quarantine there will be new laws to protect women sports and football and other money making sports will have to pay for them.
In short, that is a dumb idea.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

I would. My opinion on Whitlock started when crucified Notre Dame for firing Willingham with all kinds of half-truths and slander about it being a "race." Years later Miami fires Randy Shannon, another black coach "doing everything right" and he doesn't say a peep. Whitlock has also been accused of paying people to write articles for him and the like.

My opinion isn't worth much, but he's one of my top 2 least respected journalists with Jamele Hill. Both of them try to make everything about race and refuse to deal in facts.

So true. I like to read the hundreds of comments below Hill's articles that basically shoot holes through every single point she tries to make. Whitlock drives me insane too when he goes off on tangents.

I saw OSU fans are whining because when one former player was being interviewed about the improprieties at Auburn, there was an OSU logo in the background. Those guys will find anything to complain about.

*I didn't get to see this special, was it worth watching at all?

 

[Rhode Irish]

My opinion isn't worth much, but he's one of my top 2 least respected journalists with Jamele Hill. Both of them try to make everything about race and refuse to deal in facts.

We can definitely agree on Jemele Hill. She is the worst writer I have ever read, in any medium. Like I said, I'm not a huge fan of Whitlock, either. I disagree with him a lot of the time. But just because I disagree with him doesn't make him an idiot, in my mind. It may make him wrong, but smart people can be wrong, too.

 

[Irish Fam]

I recently wrote a fairly lengthy paper on the idea of paying college athletes. And in short, it just is not financially possible. By far most collegiate athletic programs do not cover their own costs. Only paying players whose programs are profitable would not last very long due to Title IX.

 

[Rhode Irish]

I agree, but i don't know many women sports that are in the black more than the men.

This is my point, though. I think you can treat men's basketball and football differently than other men's sports and all women's sports because they create revenue for the university. You are not treating them differently on the basis of sex (operative words from the statute), but on the basis of profitability. Further, I do not think that profit-generating sports should be included in the equation that determines the Title IX quota in terms of scholarships for mens and womens sports. There is a clear difference between sports that cost the university money to operate and those that produce revenues for the university, much of which goes to funding the other sports.

 

[NDFANnSouthWest]

The sticking point I have is when a SW Company like EA Sports uses a kids "image" in a game...and pays someone...should that athlete get any compensation? Where and who is getting the cash....NCAA? The University? To me that is a loaded subject....

 

[IrishSteelhead]

The sticking point I have is when a SW Company like EA Sports uses a kids "image" in a game...and pays someone...should that athlete get any compensation? Where and who is getting the cash....NCAA? The University? To me that is a loaded subject....

Remember when former Nebraska/ASU QB Sam Keller tried to sue EA Sports over using his likeness?

Quick Edit: I can assure you it wasn't his likeness, for I once played a Dynasty with ASU and he didn't average 4 INTs a game

 

[BestBIrish47]

If we started legally paying College Players, how long would it take for a CBA like issue to break down? I couldn't take not having Notre Dame Football to obsess over.

 

[Folsteam_Ahead]

I know a lawyer or even an AD can twist it anyway but this is the first line of Title IX



I would take the "benefits of" as saying that everyone should require the same compensation.

but here is the actual Title IX Law

Title IX, Education Amendment of 1972

that generic phrasing leaves A LOT of wiggle room that any half decent attorney would gladly tear apart in court.

 

[irishtrain]

I'm glad I didnt watch the show now that you guys have filled me in. Rich Rod had some interesting things to say last Bowl Season while commenting that perked up my ears. He was honest when he said the culture provided by the SEC schools definetly promotes the wins. Read into it what you will. As far as the reporters you are talking about by my opinion they are 'hacks'. My last comment is to agree with the brillant comment made earlier-want to clean up this mess and set a tone?-sandblast the face of the earth at Auburn/Ohio State and give them the death penalty. That will stop it.

 

[TDHeysus]

OMG...Whitlock is killing me! Pay someone 100K to graduate with a degree....wtf

I didnt see the special, but I did happen to catch that one answer by Whitlock. On the surface it seems absurd, but the more I thought about it.....The universites are paying kids right now anyways! they are just doing 'behind closed doors'. Whitlock suggested that universities pay athlete upon graduation, if for nothing else to save integrity. the process as it is now, has no integrity from anyone on any level of the recruitment process.

I As far as Whitlock, I'm not a huge fan but I don't think he is an idiot, either. He is clearly an intelligent guy. He is also frequently wrong and appears to enjoy playing the contrarian. But I think it is inaccurate to call him an idiot.

I agree with this...for me, Whitlock is kind of like Stephen A. Smith; My initial reaction to seeing these guys is, "Oh sheet, here we go..." but usually by the end of the interview he has said something that made sense, or at least made me think about something in a way I havent thought about. I'm not a fan of Whitlock, but I will listen to what he has to say.

My last comment is to agree with the brillant comment made earlier-want to clean up this mess and set a tone?-sandblast the face of the earth at Auburn/Ohio State and give them the death penalty. That will stop it.

Yes, yes, yes. As Ed Rendell so eloquently said last year, we have become a nation of wusses. Where no one is made to be responsible, or accoutable. I say drop the hammer, early and often, the rest will get inline quickly. But if Universities are able to operate with no fear of reprocussion, then it will perpetuate indefintely.

 

[davydoc]

Anybody any links to watch this again ?