White Cal xc/track athlete quits via screenshot because NCAA is racist; surprised coach doesn’t respond.

The problem is that it is a white kid that "all of a sudden realized how racist the NCAA is"... he's like a white kid showing up to BLM protests.

Many good points here. Just to give some perspective, I competed in XC and track (women’s teams) on the D1 level and my coaches bent over backwards to make practice work around class. We had a common practice time every day but if you happened to have a lab or something unavoidable, they would meet you when you were available for the workout. This even meant driving to soft trails on a regular run day just to make sure you were accommodated. We also knew when the practice time was ahead of making our academic schedules each semester so you could generally work it so that you didn’t have to miss practice. And that was at a medium-sized liberal arts school (~5000 undergrads) so the number of class offerings were pretty diverse, but you were going to run into conflict every now and then. Maybe more or less of a problem at smaller or larger schools with less or more offerings.

We did miss occasional classes when traveling for competition (which we needed written permission and documentation for) and I can imagine that this is a much bigger obstacle for football and basketball athletes. I did have Russian class with a current NBA Star and he was often escorted to class, came late and left early always, and was on his phone the entire time. I always felt like his one year of “school” (even though I wasn’t privy to his other classes which he may well have been enthusiastic in) was a pretty silly facade.

And in the vein of compensating athletes, I also have thought that it would be cool if some of the athletes in higher revenue sports could choose to opt-in to a program where they pretty much exclusively play for the university for 3 or 4 years without the distraction of many classes and then the majority that don’t go pro would be “compensated“ by the university with further education- with very intentional job training and career prep. Like make being an athlete in these sports an actual degree track and have classes in leadership, nutrition, coaching, etc along the way for the years of eligibility. But then allow them to continue that degree to something more traditional at no additional cost (like you can then stay and major in Business or Engineering still when your realize you are not going pro and do not desire to coach).

I’d imagine many would still opt for the more traditional 4 year route because who wants to spend 8 years of their lives in undergrad? But for athletes who struggle to graduate with meaningful preparation for the workforce because of the demands of athletic life (and perhaps relaxed admissions standards for athletes/lack of prep from high school) it would be a nice option and maybe a more practical solution than direct compensation. Because making $50,000 (I don’t actually know what the compensation figures would be so excuse my ignorance) for 4-5 years plus a flimsy undergrad degree will not take you nearly as far in life as getting a good job starting at $70,000 a year with a meaningful education and career prep to set you up for the rest of your life.

I totally 100% disagree with the guy.

I went to Yale and was a student athlete and my parents paid my way. Never once felt exploited. Yet he claims to be exploited? Grouping himself in as a distance runner compared to a famous football player is a disservice to any problems that need to be addressed in the NCAA.

I can't figure out half of his argument. I get he wants to help make change and such, but... I mean his Director of TF/XC is a black female, why not reach out to her first about making a plan to enact change, to see what she had to say about how he could best help with social justice? Instead he quits via screenshot to his XC coach and it's just all done so poorly.

Cooper- if you're listening... If you want to make change, stop making irrational and false statements and from now on refuse all interviews. The fact you were even interviewed at all is WHITE privilege. Next time, refuse the interview and find a minority counterpart to speak. I'm 100% certain she/he will make a more impactful , honest and coherent argument that is appropriately self-serving. You are not a victim here, stop making it about you.

#blessed

nawledgeisP wrote:

You shoot down my first 1500 comment by saying he wasn't fast and shouldn't be in the event and later you say his complaint isn't a serious one. I'm checking the W colum on this one.

No, I said that his 1500m comment was a joke because he didn't think he had any right to be running it with his poor speed, I'm assuming. Column has an 'n' in it.

Oh. Thaks

The logical extension is not that all players should be paid but that all players who contribute to university profits should be paid. Athletes in non-revenue sports are a net drain on the university in terms of money, whereas athletes in revenue-generating sports (at revenue-generating programs) are subsidizing the university itself and should get a share of the literally tens to hundreds of millions their teams generate every year.

So who gets paid? Only the good football players? If I’m the 3rd string backup do I get paid when the first sting guy gets hurt and the second string guy is a running QB and they need a passer this week? What if I through 3 interceptions and lose the game, do I owe the school money? Top athletes in non-rev sports, Olympics swimmers or track athletes, are certainly more deserving of a pay check than the punter or the 5th sting outside linebacker?

I don’t think anyone on here is vehemently opposer NIL options for athletes, rev or non-rev, the main issue with this bro was that he was not coherent or factual with his commentary. And just seems like a whiney self serving nobody trying to make a name not a change.

Wow... ok... show us a profit/loss sheet at any single public college to justify this. Where would you cut the "tens/hundreds of millions of dollars from to give to athletes?? Women's sports? Sports Psychs? Trainers? the "lower income" workers who mow lawns? academic support? the XC coach who gets paid 60k a year? This is the type of statement that people swoon to "Athletic departments make millions!!!" When in fact only a few actually understand where it is spent... on the ENTIRE department. Do people have any idea on how the actual money is spent! Brojos helps please!

zxcvzcvx wrote:

The logical extension is not that all players should be paid but that all players who contribute to university profits should be paid. Athletes in non-revenue sports are a net drain on the university in terms of money, whereas athletes in revenue-generating sports (at revenue-generating programs) are subsidizing the university itself and should get a share of the literally tens to hundreds of millions their teams generate every year.

Here's your logical extension... all of the money earned from TV revenue for all the D1 conferences should be distributed evenly among all of the D1 schools. That's the way to make it equal. Let them decide what to do with it. (Of course the big money schools won't want to do that but that's what college athletics should be about.)

Athletes who are on a full get a free education if they want it. Are there some sacrifices? Sure there are... just like anything else in life. Paying athletes will kill non-revenue sports.

I think something to consider is that the athletes generating revenue in college have zero say in how the money is spent. You say it gets pumped back into athletics, which is, in part, true but who is to say that the allocations are correct? Administrative pay, coaching salaries, facilities, etc. That stuff has ballooned over the last several decades. There is so much money involved in football/basketball & that money is made because of the athletes. They don't have a union or player association & they cannot collectively bargain.

& I'm not here to say what the right number should be for them but you have to see how scared the NCAA is & how protective they are of their power. I don't see why anybody would be against those athletes sitting down with their universities to go over budgets & see if things are being done equitably. Maybe (I doubt it) when you break it all down, there isn't much money to go around but sometimes you don't unionize or participate in a collective group to get paid more. They could better advocate for things like health care, tutors, being able to major in what you want to major (some of the things from that article), etc. Right now, a lot of decisions get made that have to do with big amounts of money by people who are managing the unpaid labor out on the field or court. That would sound silly in any other workplace in America.

Crybaby.

Let me say first of all I'm European, in a European college, so I think I have a neutral view on the NCAA I'd say.

It starts out with the text bubble saying he started in August 2016 and quit in August 2020. Doesn't that just mean he graduated?

"It fundamentally goes against the rhetoric the NCAA spits—we’re compensating you with an education, and that’s “priceless.” But you’re not even giving us a real education. Like, a real education. You can’t join clubs. You miss school. How can you say school is more important if you miss school for sports? "

>It's weird that you would miss school, but I'd guess you'd be able to catch up? If not that is crazy I agree, but I don't necessarily see how that ties in with racism as I'd think all races would miss out on school? Not only minorities?

>Also not joining clubs is not exclusive to the NCAA. I miss most parts of college life, I don't go out, I don't drink, I haven't joined a frat. But that's a sacrifice I am willing to make because I want to be good at this sport.

> The first time he found out about racism was in college at Washington State? Did he not learn about slavery and segregation in high school? Did he not have access to the news or the internet? Not a critique of him, just seems very absurd to me.

"Ironically, this same institution, when they sit athletes down and show them compliance sideshows, says social media use is a privilege, not a right. And they even misspell “privilege.”

> The rules written in the picture don't seem crazy and sound like things you should do anyway if you want to get a job later in life. Also, I don't see how this has anything to do with racism if all student-athletes have to follow these rules, but please enlighten me. Also, they made a typo, wow.

“What if there was some sort of, you know, not a real union, but a fake union or a showing of solidarity.” Just the idea of athletes coming together to talk to each other seemed really powerful to me—standing up for something that they believed in."

> Genuinely sounds like a good idea to try to help people fight racism! I don't understand however how the NCAA is to blame for racism on campus. I would say this is every individual person and every colleges' own responsibility. It's sad that the University didn't really follow up with his idea.

From this point on, I think he makes some good points. I don't see however why athletes should be paid and how it is racist that they don't get paid. You get free education, housing, flying across and exploring a freaking continent, and racing and training with a fantastic team. I'd think this is great, and especially for minorities with an unfortunate socioeconomic background. I know plenty of people from where I live who would love to be running in the NCAA. But maybe we have a bad view of things, which is very much possible.

Overall I think he is probably a great guy and genuinely wants to help, but he makes some points that could be distracting the reader from the goal.

Also, he had to run the 1500. So sad :(. (I know he's joking probably lol).

Investing, politics, and covid politics wrote:

LRC Note. We added to the title to make it more descriptive.

"Athlete quits via screenshot; surprised coach doesn’t respond. "

That's confusing on multiple levels. No debate. But what does changing "athlete" to "white cal xc/track athlete" do to clarify? That has gotta be even more confusing. The intent of the edited thread title seems to be click-baiting.

Yeah, this thread is #1 most clicked now. Unsurprising. Thread title had racial implications to begin with, and then they edited it to "white cal athlete" to make it more juicy. There's not much real discussion going on, just people agreeing with each other after clicking on a clickbait thread.

99.99% of the employees of any company have zero say in how income or profits are allocated.

Embarrassed for his High School English Teacher wrote:

99.99% of the employees of any company have zero say in how income or profits are allocated.

and that's racist.

racism at its finest wrote:

Embarrassed for his High School English Teacher wrote:

99.99% of the employees of any company have zero say in how income or profits are allocated.

and that's racist.

Please, explain how that’s racist?

Embarrassed for his High School English Teacher wrote:

racism at its finest wrote:

and that's racist.

Please, explain how that’s racist?

Don't look now, but you're racism is showing!

Here's the irony of the whole thing. If you follow this kid on social and the other things he's published, he's obviously been very outspoken about paying college athletes because of racism as we've already covered (I have not been able to find anywhere where he claims non-revenue athletes such as himself should be paid...can letsrun interview him to ask?) and also very recently supportive of #blackopportunitiesmatter in reference to Minnesota cutting track and field...and what is sure to be a blood bath of many more men's track and field programs. He also declares himself that he helped spearhead the #optout movement that almost ended fall college football.

Fast forward a couple months later and now every football conference in the country is playing this fall (producing revenue) except the Pac-12 (losing millions in revenue because of it) - this athlete's home conference. If this kid was really that instrumental in getting football players (especially black ones) to #optout, it would appear the rest of the country told him to shove it and that they can speak for themselves (and that they want to play), except the Pac-12. Can letsrun interview him when several men's track programs in the Pac12 are cut - including both of his former programs - and see if he's proud of how instrumental he's been in eliminating black opportunities? I'm serious Wejo...you know how lit that would be.