Cam Newton wins the Heisman, then ESPN airs 30 for 30 documentary about the SMU death penalty football program, replete with pay for play booster stories. What do you guys think about the timing of these events?
Cam Newton wins the Heisman, then ESPN airs 30 for 30 documentary about the SMU death penalty football program, replete with pay for play booster stories. What do you guys think about the timing of these events?
Man, that was an eye-opening 30 for 30. It's amazing how much these schools get away with, and how much the NCAA is such a joke for making all the money they do off "amateurs."
I thought about that as well.
aggies wrote:
Man, that was an eye-opening 30 for 30. It's amazing how much these schools get away with, and how much the NCAA is such a joke for making all the money they do off "amateurs."
What I want to know is where the hell does all the money go? Fewer than half of the FBS football programs make money, and fewer than 30 make money year in and year out. Of the 430+ NCAA schools at all levels that run football programs, the number that make profits are less than 100.
The number of NCAA athletic programs that are in the red are under 20!
Then again the fat cats and bigwigs that sponsor the Tostitos Bowl and the Rose Bowl and the other 35 bowls all get their millions of dollars that the NCAA doesnt get.
Yes, I'd say it is a conglomeration of factors that are diffuse enough to appear unrelated, but when you step away and wonder "what the hell," you've got to get back to boosters and bowls. Nothing makes sense at the athletic department level, but people are making money hand over fist off of college football.
The 30 for 30 was outstanding.
I thought it was funny when Newton said in his acceptance speech, "My parents do a lot of things behind the scenes that go unnoticed."
Not the best choice of words at all.
Have all of the teams which have been named national champion cheat at some level?
Ess Gee Ess wrote:
The 30 for 30 was outstanding.
Just about every 30 for 30 I've seen in the series has been great. I haven't seen them all, but so far the two I have found the most interesting are the ones about the Colombian soccer team (surprise since I don't really like soccer) and Marcus Dupree. But they have all for the most part been very well done.
Cam Newton wrote:
Cam Newton wins the Heisman, then ESPN airs 30 for 30 documentary about the SMU death penalty football program, replete with pay for play booster stories. What do you guys think about the timing of these events?
.
I know. The school, the NCAA, the coach, the networks, the apparel companies make tens of millions of dollars off of this kid and others just like him -- how dare he or his Dad see a few bucks out of it. They should embrace their poverty and be thankful that their owners let them perform for free
I don't think it was much of a coincidence at all. ESPN has known for months now that Cam was a top contender for the Heisman and the timing to air that 30 for 30 fit perfectly.
Irony. The collective head in the sand adulation this guy is receiving is actually more reminding me of the media surrounding the McGuire/Sosa juiced up major league coverage of the 90's. Everyone knows this kid is crooked (granted so is most of CFB) but they are ignoring it. I hope something major comes out before the NC game, granted I don't know how much more of a smoking gun you need than his record the last 4 yrs and the fact that his dad was pimping him..
The Real UncleB wrote:
I know. The school, the NCAA, the coach, the networks, the apparel companies make tens of millions of dollars off of this kid and others just like him -- how dare he or his Dad see a few bucks out of it. They should embrace their poverty and be thankful that their owners let them perform for free
I know you are just trolling, but: the school and the NCAA are not making money off him. And he certainly is not playing for free (whatever consideration a full scholarship is, it certainly is not playing for free).
Kyle King.
kickin it in el azizia wrote:
I know you are just trolling, but: the school and the NCAA are not making money off him. And he certainly is not playing for free (whatever consideration a full scholarship is, it certainly is not playing for free).
By definition the NCAA and school are non-profit, so they don't make a profit. As someone above noted, most schools don't make a net profit off their athletic programs, but that doesn't include the donations their general funds get from folks due to their love of sports.
The NCAA's sole purpose is athletics, however, and they depend critically on these high profile teams and players. The NCAA's revenue from television, marketing rights and championship revenues is $700 million. Their revenue form dues and such is $10 million.
Further, the NCAA colludes with professional leagues to maintain, as best they can, a monopoly on young players.
The Real UncleB wrote:
I know. The school, the NCAA, the coach, the networks, the apparel companies make tens of millions of dollars off of this kid and others just like him -- how dare he or his Dad see a few bucks out of it. They should embrace their poverty and be thankful that their owners let them perform for free
Well for a retard like Newton a degree won't mean much but they are not playing for free.
It has to rub the Auburn professors the wrong way when Cam Newton is on tv for the world to see, and he butchers English grammar. Yes, he appeared nervous, so I am not talking about repeating himself, or using "umm" too often. I am talking about his use of plural subjects with singular verbs, etc. I'd love to hear from an actual professor when these football and basketball "student-athletes" speak, representing these institutions of higher learning.
auburn english dept wrote:
It has to rub the Auburn professors the wrong way when Cam Newton is on tv for the world to see, and he butchers English grammar. Yes, he appeared nervous, so I am not talking about repeating himself, or using "umm" too often. I am talking about his use of plural subjects with singular verbs, etc. I'd love to hear from an actual professor when these football and basketball "student-athletes" speak, representing these institutions of higher learning.
He is a football player. He speaks good enough. He is not expected to be a good speaker. Nerves play a huge roll in what comes out of his mouth. In other interviews, he has spoken well.
He appears, to my wife and I, to have a speech problem, lots of stuttering. Let's make fun of someone with a LD. Yeah, I feel so much better about myself.
turd in a jar wrote: He is a football player. He speaks good enough. He is not expected to be a good speaker. Nerves play a huge roll in what comes out of his mouth.
Wow. Just wow.
I said not the nervous issues. The English issues. The guy went to elementary, middle, and high school, followed by at least 3 post-secondary schools: Florida, the junior college in Texas, and Auburn. At some point, even if it was just the athletic department's media guy preparing him for interviews, someone must have pointed out that a plural noun (such as "coaches" or "teammates") is not followed by a singular verb (such as "is"). He is in a nationally accredited university, my friend. He is an educated person, not a street thug. Somebody had to be cringing at that example of priorities in college sports.