Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
You dont live in cali do you? Many times, especially in my area, it can reach 90-92 IN JANUARY

Oh no! It's hot! Whatever will you do!

My school just got brand new workout equipment, but for some reason im a a class with no proper overhead, No air conditioning and a class of 40 in a room meant to hold 25. I feel No sympathy there for football players who complain

Honestly man... I PREFER having a gym that is "old school" No A/C, no windows (or bars/grating over them), duct tape on any/all "seating"/benches, etc. the beginnings of oxidation on most of the plates, the smell of old sweat, and bars in squat racks that have a permanent bend in them from the amount of weight thrown on them... yeah, THATS a gym, none of that 24 hour fitness, hospital sterile places that people seem to demand nowadays.


And also... that football team that has a "private" gym....they're in there a minimum of 5 days a week. How often do you go to the gym, 2-3, for an hour or two? I will agree with you on the point of, if I heard a college football player complaining about their gym accomodations, yeah, Id have no sympathy either.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


Honestly man... I PREFER having a gym that is "old school" No A/C, no windows (or bars/grating over them), duct tape on any/all "seating"/benches, etc. the beginnings of oxidation on most of the plates, the smell of old sweat, and bars in squat racks that have a permanent bend in them from the amount of weight thrown on them... yeah, THATS a gym

Couldn't agree more. I almost always have to wear sweats when I workout at one of the gyms I belong to because it's always freezing inside and when I'm hitting it I want to sweat.

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
You dont live in cali do you? Many times, especially in my area, it can reach 90-92 IN JANUARY

Oh no! It's hot! Whatever will you do!

Listen I know you hate colleges, but stuffing 30-40 students in a class with no AC iis just wrong. But nope, The water polo team needs to import more players from Serbia, NO AC FOR YOU

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Listen I know you hate colleges, but stuffing 30-40 students in a class with no AC iis just wrong. But nope, The water polo team needs to import more players from Serbia, NO AC FOR YOU

I don't hate colleges. For the umpteenth time.

But this complaint is incredibly childish.

And feel lucky you only have 30-40. There are plenty of classrooms in old buildings in old universities that house 200 students and don't have AC.

Seriously. You're gonna bitch about A/C?

YES I am. You arent in the class where the heat is so bad, two people(Including me) have passed out

 cincydooley wrote:
And listen: I think the NCAA is about as corrupt as FIFA, but I don't think the players are entitled to any pay from the universities.

They aren't entitled to pay. What they are entitled to is the ability to negotiate for pay. You know what I see in the whole "they're amateurs, they can't get paid argument"? Fear. Fear of losing the rules that let them give a tiny cut of the revenue from sports to the people doing all of the work, and fear that the free market value of those athletes is considerably more than the scholarship offers they receive. And so the minor-league football programs will cling to their obsolete rules about "student athletes" and try desperately to avoid letting their employees negotiate for better pay.

 Peregrine wrote:
What they are entitled to is the ability to negotiate for pay.

Or, at the very least, how much time they are forced to spend playing or training. By rule NCAA coaches can only require their players to devote 20 hours of time to the program, in practice it ends up being ~40.

Student-athletes became athlete-students a long time ago.

 Peregrine wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
And listen: I think the NCAA is about as corrupt as FIFA, but I don't think the players are entitled to any pay from the universities.

They aren't entitled to pay. What they are entitled to is the ability to negotiate for pay. You know what I see in the whole "they're amateurs, they can't get paid argument"? Fear. Fear of losing the rules that let them give a tiny cut of the revenue from sports to the people doing all of the work, and fear that the free market value of those athletes is considerably more than the scholarship offers they receive. And so the minor-league football programs will cling to their obsolete rules about "student athletes" and try desperately to avoid letting their employees negotiate for better pay.

Hey, If the NFL wants to create its own D-League then do it. We all know that's essentially what NCAA football is.

Again, I'm fine with letting the athletes seek endorsements.

Is probably even agree that a small percentage of the athletes (the Winston's, the manziels, the mccarrons) are worth more than their scholarships are "valued at," but if they were able to "negotiate for pay" how do you reconcile the other 98% of the players? Do you allow say, Alabama to eschew all of their non-profitable sports and decide to dedicate all that money to signing football players? It would put even more with the haves and create an even larger gap between them and the have nots.

But it comes down to a fundamental disagreement about them being employees. I don't give a gak what the corrupt as hell NLRB says (especially in Chicago) but they're not employees.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
YES I am. You arent in the class where the heat is so bad, two people(Including me) have passed out

Sniffles for you.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/?single_page=true

This article is the reason why I support the players.

 cincydooley wrote:
Is probably even agree that a small percentage of the athletes (the Winston's, the manziels, the mccarrons) are worth more than their scholarships are "valued at," but if they were able to "negotiate for pay" how do you reconcile the other 98% of the players?

Let the free market decide what minor-league athletes are worth. The other 98% are free to negotiate their salaries as well.

And no, I don't think that 98% of minor-league football players are worth less than their current salaries. Nor do I think you could replace them easily without sacrificing competitiveness against other teams that pay their "other 98%" players better, since nobody will play for a team that offers below-average salaries for their level of talent. I think this is exactly what these "schools" are afraid of: if the athletes can negotiate for better pay then the teams will be forced to give it to them or watch all of their recruits go play elsewhere and their value to the university collapse.

Do you allow say, Alabama to eschew all of their non-profitable sports and decide to dedicate all that money to signing football players?

If that's what they think is a good plan, then sure, do that. I doubt they will, because even though football is important those other sports add enough value to the school that they're willing to invest in them.

But it comes down to a fundamental disagreement about them being employees. I don't give a gak what the corrupt as hell NLRB says (especially in Chicago) but they're not employees.

Under what definition are they not employees? They're performing a service for pay. All this ruling does is make it official and allow them to negotiate as employees.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Seems silly to join something like a Union you'd only be part of for a few years at most.

I doubt it would be anything like other unions, I can't tell if that would be good or bad though.

Just like the NFL.

On the one hand, I'm overjoyed that my expectations of college jocks are met and that they'll happily shoot themselves in the foot with their inflated egos. On the other hand, kind of disappointed that the majority of college athletes who are okay people might get cut out of their scholarships.

I say we do pay them all athletes actually and make them pay for their college like everyone else

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
You dont live in cali do you? Many times, especially in my area, it can reach 90-92 IN JANUARY

Oh no! It's hot! Whatever will you do!

Actually, that can be a health hazard.


hotsauceman1, Where to you live?

 Peregrine wrote:

If that's what they think is a good plan, then sure, do that. I doubt they will, because even though football is important those other sports add enough value to the school that they're willing to invest in them.

What value is that, exactly? It certainly isn't financial.

Sports teams existed at the college level for two main reasons; advertising and cultural tradition. Sports teams are often used to identify the student body's 'identity' and are a major part of campus culture/pride. Think of schools as having nationalism and their sports team is their military. It doesn't make them much money, but they take pride in being able to trott the team around and beat up the neighbors.

As for cultural reason, human beings like sports and think they're worthwhile even if you're not being paid for it.

I personally doubt the NCAA will survive having to pay athletes. Most schools already need to be paid to show up to get trounced by the big schools they can't possibly beat at large events. They don't make profit. If they have to start competing for players with pay I suspect many will just quit and the remaining teams will be too few to continue drawing national interest.

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Listen I know you hate colleges, but stuffing 30-40 students in a class with no AC iis just wrong. But nope, The water polo team needs to import more players from Serbia, NO AC FOR YOU

I don't hate colleges. For the umpteenth time.

But this complaint is incredibly childish.

And feel lucky you only have 30-40. There are plenty of classrooms in old buildings in old universities that house 200 students and don't have AC.

Seriously. You're gonna bitch about A/C?

Childish that he is complaining about tempratures in classrooms getting dangerously high, to the point people are passing out? Ye. Thats realy childish and wingey. If his school are putting money in to sports (which you claim schools do) at the cost of basic safty of students then there is something very wrong.

I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. Either schools are putting money in to sports, in which case when the sports have massive budgets they should be putting the students first and cutting budgets rather than taking money out of general budgets, or the sports are pulling in allot of money and are living off the player students.

 Steve steveson wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

Listen I know you hate colleges, but stuffing 30-40 students in a class with no AC iis just wrong. But nope, The water polo team needs to import more players from Serbia, NO AC FOR YOU

I don't hate colleges. For the umpteenth time.

But this complaint is incredibly childish.

And feel lucky you only have 30-40. There are plenty of classrooms in old buildings in old universities that house 200 students and don't have AC.

Seriously. You're gonna bitch about A/C?

Childish that he is complaining about tempratures in classrooms getting dangerously high, to the point people are passing out? Ye. Thats realy childish and wingey. If his school are putting money in to sports (which you claim schools do) at the cost of basic safty of students then there is something very wrong.

I'm sorry, you can't have it both ways. Either schools are putting money in to sports, in which case when the sports have massive budgets they should be putting the students first and cutting budgets rather than taking money out of general budgets, or the sports are pulling in allot of money and are living off the player students.

Usually it doesn't work that way...

The budgets for the schools are distinctly separate from the sports department. At least, that's how the public Universities are structured. I have no fething clue on Private institutions though.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
I hope Northwestern blocks any player that decides to unionize from their respective sport under the premise that, as union members, they're employees, and as employees, they're professionals.

And we all know no professionals in the NCAA.

While the sentiment is nice, I don't think NW could survive without any of its sports programs. While theyre not a powerhouse by any stretch they, like so many other schools do depend on the money brought in through the sports programs.


I honestly think the NCAA is just about finished... They're the proverbial Ivan Drago. Right now, they're in their corner, bloodied saying "he's not a man, he's like hitting a piece of iron"

Depend on money brought in by sports??? As if ridiculously high tuitions weren't a thing...

The NCAA has made millions upon millions off the nation wide showing of collegiate level sports while denying the players a penny for their efforts.

Because most of those athletes aren't getting degrees for free or anything...

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, whats with a freaking Hockey coach getting paid more than a Football coach?

Clearly the Canadians have been covertly subverting Vermont's youth!

And apparently our educational system, bro thats New Hampshire, not Vermont. And I say, good on them, Hockey is a superior sport.

 whembly wrote:
Usually it doesn't work that way...

The budgets for the schools are distinctly separate from the sports department. At least, that's how the public Universities are structured. I have no fething clue on Private institutions though.

Cincydooley and Hotsauce were both claiming that sports are subsidised by the universities. No idea if that is true, possibly not, but I was just thought the argument was stupid and Cincydooley was being rather unfair on Hotsauce and his language was uncalled for.

chaos0xomega wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Yeah, whats with a freaking Hockey coach getting paid more than a Football coach?

Clearly the Canadians have been covertly subverting Vermont's youth!

And apparently our educational system, bro thats New Hampshire, not Vermont. And I say, good on them, Hockey is a superior sport.

2 basically identically shaped states right next to each other. Big deal I mixed them up

 Steve steveson wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Usually it doesn't work that way...

The budgets for the schools are distinctly separate from the sports department. At least, that's how the public Universities are structured. I have no fething clue on Private institutions though.

Cincydooley and Hotsauce were both claiming that sports are subsidised by the universities. No idea if that is true, possibly not, but I was just thought the argument was stupid and Cincydooley was being rather unfair on Hotsauce and his language was uncalled for.

You have no idea if it's true because you didn't bother to look at a single link I provided.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
You dont live in cali do you? Many times, especially in my area, it can reach 90-92 IN JANUARY

Oh no! It's hot! Whatever will you do!

Actually, that can be a health hazard.


hotsauceman1, Where to you live?

Bay area, Typically its mild(Low 70s) but we can have fluke days where it reaches 90s in January. And the way the classes are built(Large windows with the the directly on them most of the day, 30+ students in the size of like four cars the heat can get bad)

So they should install expensive central a/c to accommodate for these "fluke" days. Makes sense.

Its not just the fluke days(Those are the worst) Even on mild days it is bad because the sun is directly going through those window, like a magnyfying glass.
Listen Cincy, You are just trolling now.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Its not just the fluke days(Those are the worst) Even on mild days it is bad because the sun is directly going through those window, like a magnyfying glass.
Listen Cincy, You are just trolling now.

I'm not trolling. I think your complaint is a pretty clear case of first world problems and is a really, really petty complaint.

 cincydooley wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Its not just the fluke days(Those are the worst) Even on mild days it is bad because the sun is directly going through those window, like a magnyfying glass.
Listen Cincy, You are just trolling now.

I'm not trolling. I think your complaint is a pretty clear case of first world problems and is a really, really petty complaint.

In cramped, un-cooled classrooms with little ventilation it is a health hazard.

And the complaint of Concussions from football is just as stupid
Jesus, im done. You cant be reasoned with.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
YES I am. You arent in the class where the heat is so bad, two people(Including me) have passed out

Go to a better college.