[HN Gopher] The NCAA Erased My Career
___________________________________________________________________
The NCAA Erased My Career
Author : 83457
Score : 125 points
Date : 2021-04-24 21:14 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theplayerstribune.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theplayerstribune.com)
| turndown wrote:
| I always wonder about the upbringing(read: brainwashing) that
| fans of the NCAA who are such rabid defenders of its "heritage"
| had to have gotten to believe such childish things. The NCAA is
| the ultimate unpaid internship; if you are such a big fan of
| those, I encourage you to quit your paying job(if you have one)
| and pursue one.
|
| I remember in high school(~6-10 years ago for me) people would
| talk about situations with the NCAA like this, and people who had
| absolutely no stake whatsoever in the system would defend it,
| often with the kind of weak arguments many have mentioned in this
| thread. Disappointing that we can't simply agree that people
| working should be proportionately paid. Some mention scholarships
| and the like, and I don't think that this is a "terrible" system,
| but it's clearly incredibly weighed in favor of the NCAA and the
| schools themselves.
| dehrmann wrote:
| Is there something like libel-by-omission for cases like this?
| dmurray wrote:
| This athlete got a scholarship, elite coaching, a college degree
| and is now playing her sport professionally. She's a beneficiary
| of the system, not a casualty of it.
|
| The only harm that has been done is that the NCAA has written her
| out of its internal records (it's dishonest to say "My Career"
| when it explicitly refers to her achievements as a professed
| amateur).
|
| The NCAA does things that seem exploitative and wrong to me. But
| it also helps a lot of people. This young lady's outrage is not a
| good argument for the former.
| crooked-v wrote:
| > it's dishonest to say "My Career" when it explicitly refers
| to her achievements as a professed amateur
|
| NCAA's claims of "amateurism" are blatantly dishonest in the
| first place. They control what are pro minor leagues in every
| way except for the denial of straightforward compensation to
| the players.
| notacoward wrote:
| That's one of the worst _ad hominems_ I 've ever seen. Sure,
| the author herself might have done OK, but she's pretty
| explicit that the incident affected others and that there are
| many more who haven't been so fortunate. She even names several
| and tells their stories. She uses her own case only as an
| example, not as the basis for her entire argument. Dismissing
| it because "she's a beneficiary" is absurd.
| dmurray wrote:
| > she's pretty explicit that the incident affected others and
| that there are many more who haven't been so fortunate. She
| even names several and tells their stories.
|
| For the three other athletes mentioned by name, in each case
| the story is that they had medical issues caused by,
| exacerbated by, or at least neglected by the NCAA. That's a
| real injustice and a real story. What happened to the author
| is meh.
| richwater wrote:
| The whole concept of college sports has been detrimental to what
| should be the true goal of these institutions: educating our next
| generation.
| zackbloom wrote:
| Ultimately everything is a system. If the NCAA is incredibly
| militant about enforcing these rules, the schools will be
| incredibly paranoid about giving athletes any financial
| incentive. If the NCAA is more lax, schools will put less effort
| and attention to detail into enforcement. I'm not saying these
| policies are good or ethical, but this type of militant
| enforcement absolutely changes how careful schools are.
| dehrmann wrote:
| They only this strict out of self-preservation. They know
| they're ~5 years or one high-profile screw-up away from having
| to _actually pay_ football and basketball players, so they 're
| delaying it as long as they can.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| I mean, a school could just disaffiliate from the NCAA. They
| could run independent sports programs and play other
| independent schools, or join the NAIA or some other
| association, or start a new association. They won't though,
| because ultimately it's all about the money.
|
| Also to your point about enforcement, you'll see that the
| money-making programs (i.e. Football and Basketball) at the big
| D1 schools get away with a lot more operating in the gray area
| than small schools and non-revenue sports. The NCAA isn't going
| to shit in their gravy train. They save the virtue-signal
| enforcement for schools and sports that don't make any money
| anyway.
| notacoward wrote:
| > They won't though, because ultimately it's all about the
| money.
|
| Sounds like an anti-monopoly case in the making.
| Sebguer wrote:
| The entire point of the article is that the policies are bad
| and unethical. The NCAA is a system built to exploit college
| athletes from top to bottom.
| HarryHirsch wrote:
| Indeed. But where are the wokepeople from UMass Amherst? They
| are all about social justice, why can't they do something for
| their own students who are being taken advance of by college
| sports?
| Sebguer wrote:
| Did you actually look to see if they were doing anything
| before you made this comment?
|
| https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/article/umass-amherst-
| resea...
| Retric wrote:
| It's not about enforcing the rules, it's about the appearance
| of enforcing the rules.
|
| The NCAA need to seem important, which means they need people
| to break the rules regularly and be punished for it. That's
| just one of many ways their fucking over students for the
| NCAA's benefit.
|
| The appropriate response is for students to boycott the NCAA,
| but socially and financially that is a huge hit. Normally the
| way around this is a union, but good luck getting one started.
| trhway wrote:
| Can't the students start their own league? Internet broadcast
| the plays, etc. I mean NCAA is just a relic of the old TV
| epoch and is ready to be disrupted. Maybe we'll see some
| startup for it.
| alexeldeib wrote:
| It's a bad system - at least for athletes. It's inherently
| exploitative. I'd liken it to nearly-free labor. The athletes
| had no idea they were infringing. The NCAA and the schools make
| money off these athletes. The schools self-reported. There was
| no recourse for the affected individuals.
|
| The incredible power imbalance between banning these athletes
| from making money, and then turning around and doing it
| yourself while being judge, jury, and executioner, makes a
| mockery of the talent.
|
| These are barely "amateurs" in any real sense, the system
| exploits that fact and the seal of approval "amateur" status
| brings to rake in money.
| bruceb wrote:
| "It's a bad system - at least for athletes."
|
| No. It's a bad system for some athletes.
|
| Its a good system for athletes that are not stars and don't
| play big money sports. Free education, free trips, play
| something you really like to do.
|
| For other they are forgoing money they could earn.
|
| If the system changes, I am sure it will be good for some
| athletes, not so much of others.
| dehrmann wrote:
| > Its a good system for athletes that are not stars and
| don't play big money sports.
|
| Honestly, for the author, she was playing tennis and got an
| education out of it on the backs of those playing revenue
| sports. I don't fault her for this--she didn't make the
| system--but it doesn't look like she went pro, and it she
| wasn't kicked out while she was in school, so the only
| damage she's suffering is the NCAA saying she wasn't on the
| team. Unless she's coaching, and being a college athlete is
| almost a qualification, she seems to have done OK.
|
| That said, I still think she's right for calling out the
| NCAA.
| throwawayboise wrote:
| She wrote that as of 2020, "I had been playing
| professional tennis for three years"
|
| She graduated; they're not taking her degree away. And
| honestly nobody cares about the college record of a
| professional tennis player -- the fact that it was
| vacated on a technicality like this is not going to hurt
| her professional career at this point. Likely she could
| coach as well, there are coaches in the NCAA who have
| done far worse (intentionally, not accidentally) and
| still get jobs.
| dehrmann wrote:
| > I had been playing professional tennis for three years
|
| I stand corrected. When I googled her to check that
| statement, I didn't see anything promising on the first
| page. I should have looked harder.
| OminousWeapons wrote:
| I don't see why saying "athletes can be paid" should
| naturally lead to "all athletes MUST be paid". There is no
| reason you can't have a football program run as a separate
| entity with paid athletes and also have a school fencing
| program where athletes aren't paid and just play for fun
| and / or are on scholarship.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Maybe that level of athleticism should be separated from
| education and run as actual business with people paid as actual
| athletes for whatever their market value is.
| OminousWeapons wrote:
| This is precisely what should be done. The scholarship model
| should die. The athletes should be employees of the University
| and paid a salary for their work. If they want to go to college
| on top of that, they can pay for that separately or negotiate
| reduced tuition as a benefit or in lieu of salary.
| dehrmann wrote:
| I agree, but football and basketball are part of college
| culture, and it would take away a built-in fanbase. I'm not
| sure if people would be as interested in NFL-lite games with
| 100+ teams where the players and teams aren't at least
| nominally associated with colleges. I think it might be too
| late to _actually_ split them up.
| Ekaros wrote:
| Yeah, it's too ingrained now. Personally I would prefer
| breaking up the franchises, moving to regional leagues that
| could feed to top with relegations and promotions.
| Sebguer wrote:
| But then we'd damage their profits. The system you're
| describing is how it works in most of the rest of the world.
| Shacklz wrote:
| As someone not from the US, the whole role of sports in
| college/universities seems so... weird.
|
| Mixing institutions with an education and research purpose with
| sport tribalism seems like a terrible idea to begin with,
| adding tons of money to the mix surely can't result in anything
| that has anything to do with education...
| Ekaros wrote:
| I have nothing against of schools having clubs doing sports.
| Even marginally supported by funds from students for things
| like travel and gear.
|
| But the level of strange commercialisation is just different
| from rest of the world. Insane amounts of money spend and
| revenues generated, but nothing really end up at athletes.
| kdmdmdmmdmd wrote:
| The mods on this website are self serving nigggergagggggotss.
| You are not entitled to free, on topic and engagement with
| engineers to boost your rotten vulture capitalist garbage
| obfuscated products and pathetic "hacker" forum.
|
| That's really nice surprise why the most applauded engineers
| never comment here anymore
| jzwinck wrote:
| Should we also stop using tax money to subsidize education
| for doctors?
|
| College athletics are education too. It's not like you become
| a tennis pro by just hitting the gym a lot. The best players
| study the rules, study physiology, study human nature....
| [deleted]
| corndoge wrote:
| Comparing eg tennis players and doctors doesn't really
| explain anything about your position to me, one serves a
| critical public function and one does not
| jzwinck wrote:
| My position is that using tax money to further the
| development of young adults in the same community doesn't
| have to depend on their career path.
|
| I didn't realize you'd hang your hat on top level tennis
| players being less valuable people than (average/typical)
| doctors. I don't think the two careers are
| interchangeable in most cases, and if a person wants to
| become the best at a popular sport, their time in
| university is important for that and why wouldn't we want
| each member of society to reach their highest potential?
| darig wrote:
| Wait until you find out who pays for the stadiums they play
| in after they go pro.
| trentnix wrote:
| As Cartman remarked - 'student ath-o-letes...brilliant sir!'
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZB0qsJuRDo
| sunstone wrote:
| Bureaucracy run amok.
| tims33 wrote:
| Another disappointing story about the NCAA. I don't know how to
| fix it, but since the NCAA represents the schools maybe there
| should be a parallel body to represent the athletes.
| LegitShady wrote:
| >I don't know how to fix it,
|
| Stop doing anything that gives them money for any reason and
| let them know why. If enough people do it, the problem solves
| itself one way or the other.
| cortesoft wrote:
| I hate the NCAA so much. I can't believe they have the gall to
| say they need to maintain amateurism while so many people and so
| many huge corporations make billions of dollars off it. Why does
| paying the player hurt amateurism but paying the coach doesn't?
| Why would a player making $50 to sign his name on some hats ruin
| the game, but CBS paying the NCAA billions for the rights to
| broadcast the game be totally ok?
|
| If they want to insist amateurism is so important, then fine. Be
| amateur. Have student volunteers do the broadcasting, don't show
| any ads during the game, and take all the money out of it.
| Otherwise don't tell me players are the only ones who can't make
| money off of this.
| jasonwatkinspdx wrote:
| The owner of the convenience store near me played football for
| Stanford on a full ride. He's had to walk with a cane, or a
| walker on a bad day, since his 30s. It's an impediment to his
| job today, as he struggles to get around restocking throughout
| the day.
|
| College football makes obscene amounts of money, while at the
| same time discarding a ton of young athletes with permanently
| broken bodies. The TBI stuff in particular is deeply
| disturbing. I heard a heartbreaking interview with a family
| where 3 generations are entering dementia simultaneously
| because the younger 2 both played college ball.
|
| Coaches, schools, broadcasters... true fortunes being made by
| this industry every single day. But somehow giving the dang
| kids a slice of that ruins the authenticity of the league. What
| a pile of nonsense.
| Mirioron wrote:
| > _Why does paying the player hurt amateurism but paying the
| coach doesn 't? Why would a player making $50 to sign his name
| on some hats ruin the game, but CBS paying the NCAA billions
| for the rights to broadcast the game be totally ok?_
|
| Are the players underage? If the players are treated as
| employees of a business would the business have to jump through
| tons and tons of extra legal hoops?
|
| I'm not saying that this is the case. But it's not too uncommon
| that messed up situations arise as a result of society's desire
| to protect a group.
| ameliaquining wrote:
| The vast majority of American college students, including
| college athletes, are adults.
| crooked-v wrote:
| > Are the players underage?
|
| Why would that matter? Underage sports participants get money
| all the time (tournament prizes, junior racing sponsorships,
| etc).
| cortesoft wrote:
| No, they are 18-22 year olds
| antonzabirko wrote:
| Because none of it is genuine, that's why. It's an entity that
| exists to profit off young athletes.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-04-24 23:01 UTC)