NFL aint got shit on this

**CivilWars** · 02-07-13, 12:13 PM

I don't need a $9 million workout room to tell me that society's priorities are out of whack. Pro athletes, actors, and other individuals that provide nothing but entertainment make millions while teachers, public servants, and others that provide for and protect the present and shape the future of our society often have to have a second job just to get by. Colleges, and college students are low on my list of examples of this.

**WileECyte** · 02-07-13, 12:42 PM

The biggest problem is these kids have had the bullshit promise of going pro by their parents (and the rest of society) whispered in their ear since they first strapped on the pads in peewee out of sheer greed. If they had a head on their shoulders and could think for themselves they'd see the numbers and realize that the chance of them going pro, unless they are truly an elite talent are slim, and even then... with the talent... if they have character issues or make stupid decisions (like the Honey Badger) it'll cost them their precious dream of going pro.

Like almost everything in life, the problem comes back to money and greed. You can say that's the way of a capitalist society, and you're correct, but it doesn't make it right.

**Alundil** · 02-07-13, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by WileECyte

I think you will find that depending on their background, there are more there for the education than you think. The best athletes typically come from 'urban' or 'poor' backgrounds and see the dollar signs... Those who are talented, but come from a more suburban background are more likely to have a bigger plan than just 'going pro'. Most would like to go pro, but also know that your pro career can be over in a minute and you need a plan for afterwards, which usually includes education. Certain coaches and programs are better about encouraging their kids to stay in school as well. Say what you want about the scandal at Penn State, but Joe Paterno had a very high graduation rate out of his players, and not just 'underwater basket weaving' or whatever.

The courses Sandusky taught don't count.

(Too soon?)

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

**DJ Ms. White** · 02-08-13, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by Morningfrost

And speaking of "underwater basket weaving", let's not forget the example of Matt Leinart, who bravely decided to return to USC for one more season so he could complete his final class and obtain his degree....ballroom dancing.

~Morningfrost

Ballroom dancing isn't a walk in the park.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

**CivilWars** · 02-08-13, 09:58 PM

He was preparing for his post-NFL stint on Dancing with the Stars.

**Alundil** · 02-08-13, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

He was preparing for his post-NFL stint on Dancing with the Stars.

Well if Emmitt can do it....

**Morningfrost** · 02-09-13, 02:10 AM

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

Ballroom dancing isn't a walk in the park.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

Of course it's not lol, cause then it wouldn't be dancing, it'd be walking

~Morningfrost

**rock_lobster** · 02-09-13, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Morningfrost

I'm not disputing that, just pointing out that blatant shit like this just makes it even more obvious that colleges are for-profit businesses now. The tuition being high doesn't have anything to do with football, and everything to do with the colleges trying to eke out every penny of profit they can.

~Morningfrost

I will say that some of the money spent is on lavish items they probably don't need. However, in the end, the money the football programs at palces like Bama, LSU, Texas, Ohio State, etc...keep non revenue generating sports existent. Not to mention some of that money funds academic purposes as well.

In the end, if you took football away, the non revenue generating sports would fall by the waist side and academics would be funded on tuition alone. If the football program is generating its own funds, then I see no problem with that program spending it on weight rooms, better equipment, stadiums, etc...

Yes it has become a "for profit" type situation, but at the same time if the system had never turned into this, there would be less funds for all sports and some academics.

Bottom line, universities with highly touted revenue generating sports are no worse off financially than if those programs didn't exist in the first place.

ETA: I couldn't even begin to tell you the boost small business get here in Baton Rouge during LSU football and baseball season (and even basketball season when they can become competitive. Which they are attempting to do by upgrading facilities with funds generated by the football program).

**Morningfrost** · 02-09-13, 06:14 PM

Originally Posted by rock_lobster

I will say that some of the money spent is on lavish items they probably don't need. However, in the end, the money the football programs at palces like Bama, LSU, Texas, Ohio State, etc...keep non revenue generating sports existent. Not to mention some of that money funds academic purposes as well.

In the end, if you took football away, the non revenue generating sports would fall by the waist side and academics would be funded on tuition alone. If the football program is generating its own funds, then I see no problem with that program spending it on weight rooms, better equipment, stadiums, etc...

Yes it has become a "for profit" type situation, but at the same time if the system had never turned into this, there would be less funds for all sports and some academics.

Bottom line, universities with highly touted revenue generating sports are no worse off financially than if those programs didn't exist in the first place.

ETA: I couldn't even begin to tell you the boost small business get here in Baton Rouge during LSU football and baseball season (and even basketball season when they can become competitive. Which they are attempting to do by upgrading facilities with funds generated by the football program).

Very little of the sports-generated revenue is used to fund academics. Once again, I'm not saying the lavish funds spent on the sports programs are the problem, but they're a symptom of the problem, which is the blatant "for profit"-ism of institutions whose supposed goal is to prepare our young people for better futures. They do what they can to squeeze every last dime they can out of those who attend, raising tuition costs and essentially forcing students to borrow more to attend. Some schools are worse than others. Call me crazy, but I don't think it should cost a student $20,000 or more per year just to attend college. That, btw, is the in-state cost of a year at FSU. For out-of-state students, they're estimated to require nearly $38,000 per year to attend. That is insane. It's not even for specialist degrees like becoming a freaking lawyer or doctor that can afford to leave school with $80k or so in debt.

So like I said before, the money spent on the sports programs in college isn't the actual problem. It's a reminder of and a symptom of the true problem.

~Morningfrost