Yes, yet I can have a tree fall on me in the woods. I'm well aware of this fact, are they not?
Yet the brain injury is a big deal now, with all the focus from the NFL. Remember when they would say "he had his bell rung". Wait a few minutes send the guy back in. Lol
Do they not know they might get their "bell rung?" Protocols are in place now that are much advanced from a few years ago.
I've been having the same discussion on FB lately, lol... I think that the legalization of weed in some states has brought on the munchies, making stoned people eat too many fried foods, therefore clogging their arteries...
So because they are getting a free degree they should forfeit their rights to profit off their own talents??
What is free about a scholarship? Is housing free? Is food free? Is an education free? What about their allowance? Some receive upwards of $4,000.00 a year for "incidentals." So what are they not getting?
I couldn't care less about what the school pays for or provides the players while they are playing for the program. The school/program decides to take on that burden when they recruit them. But to put the players in the position to where they cannot profit in ANY WAY outside of what the school provides them is absurd.
That's the difference between professional and amateur... they have times when they can have jobs, but they are required to actually work at them...
And college athletes remain connected to the concept of amateurism why?? I could understand 20+ years ago since college athletes were the backbone of this countries Olympic sports. But there is zero reason for it anymore. College sports hold onto the idea of amateurism just because it's always been that way.
Oh I see...punish the majority for what a very small majority may try and do right? If they want to prevent NFL players from coming back and playing that's fine. But let's not pretend that's the reasoning for keeping amateurism in place.
My definition of a amateur is prolly the same as yours. A person not being paid to play in his or her sport. But that's is irrelevant since I don't believe in the idea that college athletes should continue to be bound by the definition of an amateur. Not when there is tens of billions of dollars involved and the participants generating that income aren't able to seek out there own fair market value of the money involved because the notion that a free education is an appropriate form of compensation.
That would ruin college sports. Money would be a big issue. Pay them all the same. Then what about the other college sports. ?????????
Paying them? I don't believe the burden of "paying" athletes should fall on the schools or programs. But I do believe college athletes should be able to pursue their own marketable value in terms of endorsement deals a such. Not allowing someone to directly profit off their own names is just insane to me.
Hell yes, if the schools did not promote them they would have one hell of time showing their talents.
I know, let's get that going and then deal with all kinds of problems. They get PROMOTED enough for their talents. If it wasn't for that, good luck to them.
Why does there have to be a line in terms of what an athlete can make on the free market? And I notice you are making mention of "Alabama" or "Arizona" paying different amounts. I'm not promoting the idea of the schools or programs paying athletes. Now there is no doubt some markets are more profitable than others in this country. That's just a fact of life
If they are that good, money will come. My hell a bunch of athletes go broke, don't know hoe to deal with finances. An 18 year old can even make normal decisions.
Oh you mean the current climate where college sports have no problems all?
