This may not be the stupidest thread I have seen on this forum, but it's in the running. Can we take up a collection and offer a $100 reward to anyone who can top this asshattery?
This may not be the stupidest thread I have seen on this forum, but it's in the running. Can we take up a collection and offer a $100 reward to anyone who can top this asshattery?
Luckily the NCAA will allow athletes to be paid as long as the opportunity would have been available to anyone else. So this girl is in the clear.
Does anyone know her name?
K.6 wrote:
Does anyone know her name?
Why do you want to know? Don't be a creeper. I would hope that it would be deleted if anyone posted that info.
Amazing. wrote:
SlowAFRunnrMom wrote:
You can win prizes and whatnot BEFORE college, you just can't win them while you are an NCAA athlete. If she's in high school then it won't count against her. My daughter has won races with money and shoes as the prize in middle school.
Furthermore, he cant say his gum is like adderall because of false advertising. Not because it is truly like adderall.
There are some aggressively stupid people on this site.
Yes. So much so that that should be the name of this site.
LetsAgressiveStupidly.com
Nick sounds creepy at 4:00 when he twells the 12 year old girl she has a beautiful name...sounds kinda ped-- like.
Nick's racism shows at 6:00 mark. He said he thinks he would lose because I guess he thinks black guys are all fast.
Nothing funny about it. NCAA rules are over the top especially when it comes to running. Because she is not an NCAA athlete at the moment I think she's in the clear, but I was always told NEVER accept ANY prizes for winning a race. I almost turned down a mug once, but decided nobody was going to care about that. Interested that for other sports it seems quite a bit more liberal
Tell that to the female Olympic gymnasts who had to give up NCAA because they went pro around age 16.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
Nick sounds creepy at 4:00 when he twells the 12 year old girl she has a beautiful name...sounds kinda ped-- like.
I am so sick of this crap.
#1 I enjoyed watching the episode on Nick Symmonds. It made me laugh
#2 if a guy tells a young lady she is beautiful or has a beautiful name that does not make him "ped--like".
I can tell that most of you here suffering from aspberger's syndrome or wallowing in your own misery due to your dismal failures in life won't agree but it is plenty okay in a family setting to give compliments to a kid. The girl was with her mom for gosh sakes.
I'm not 100% clear on the rules, but can't you just pay back the money if the NCAA decides to make an issue of it? I seem to remember Rupp earning prize money after high school, then just returning the money and getting his eligibility back once he decided to run for Oregon.
So if this is correct, the absolute worst case scenario is that the girl has to pay back $100 to become eligible in the incredibly unlikely event that the NCAA knows and cares about this.
OP stop being such a throbbing weenie about this. Live and let live my dude, you're harboring a lot of negative energy about this when it's entirely insignificant.
Sick Nymmonds wrote:
Ernest wrote:
The real purpose of the videos is to raise the profile and sales of Run Gum.
Beyond that, Social Blade estimates his channel monetization as follows:
$48,600.00 - $1,244,160.00
ESTIMATED YEARLY PROJECTION
He was supposed to be giving that money away, that's what he said and as soon as he started making a few bucks, he "temporarily suspended" that. Funny how he's never mentioned it again.
As for the $100 to the girl. The point is not whether the NCAA will do anything about it, obviously they will not because she's like 12 years old. The point is that they "could" later, especially with a permanent record of it on YouTube. When she goes to get certified at the NCAA eligibility center and that video pops up it, can cause her problems. You dumbasses that say it doesn't violate the rules are just plain wrong. He shouldn't be doing shyte like that anyway, it's stupid and irresponsible. You don't give other people's children money without consulting the parents, and NO he did not do that. If it were my kid I'd be pissed. He better be careful, if that girl fell, face planted and was injured, she would own Run Gum. He won't be able to separate his company from himself personally when it was clearly a promotion for Run Gum and that girl could not legally consent to participate. And again, I know he didn't ask her parents because her parents were not there.
Symmonds is a punk, plain and simple. He's an opportunist without a moral compass. He'd push his momma down the stairs and film it if she was wearing a Run Gum t-shirt and he could get a few clicks off of it.
You have a serious problem, dude. Get some help.
By the time the girl is college aged, all the insane NCAA rules will be out the door. Who the hell cares...Nick runs a great YouTube channel, better than any reality TV show.
Elvin, no one will ever make an issue of it.. The guy who started this thread is a jerk.
newtrackfan wrote:
I don't think this is an NCAA violation. She's not utilizing her name or likeness in order to profit. She just won a bet. If there was a Youtube video of her winning 100 bucks over a bet on a coin flip, would you still think it was a violation? There really isn't that much of a difference from a compliance standpoint. She's not attempting to monetize anything, and she wasn't offered the money because of her status as an athlete.
Actually yes, that would be a violation. NCAA athletes and staff are not allowed to bet or gamble on sports. She used her sports skills to profit which is currently against the rules. Or if you view it as a bet, she bet on the outcome of a sporting event which is also not allowed. Given that this is in California though, it might now be allowed under the recent law passed that prohibits the NCAA from banning athletes from earning money from their own skills and likeness. I'm not sure how that works since it's still against NCAA rules and I'm not sure if betting or gambling is now allowed. Maybe she can only go to a college in Cali as of right now for accepting this money? You can accept prizes up to the cost of participation though, so if she lived far away and was at Venice beach on vacation she could say it cost her that much to travel there to do the race. Or she had to hire a private coach to train for the race or basically make up any training/racing related reason to justify keeping the $100.
Which Olympic gymnasts had to "give up NCAAs"? There are many Olympic gymnasts now competing, or have been competing in NCAAs for the last couple of decades. Name those poor Olympic gymnasts who had to give up NCAA.
So much fake news spouted on here....
gottarun215,
MY GOD, do you really live your life like this? Worrying about some 12 year old girl taking 100 bucks in a 40 yard dash on the beach? Jesus, you need to spend more time at places like Venice Beach.
umstead wrote:
gottarun215,
MY GOD, do you really live your life like this? Worrying about some 12 year old girl taking 100 bucks in a 40 yard dash on the beach? Jesus, you need to spend more time at places like Venice Beach.
No, I don't actually care if the girl take $100 nor am I losing any sleep "worrying" about it. I was simply responding to the previous comment pointing out that whether it's considered a bet or athletic skill earning the money, it would still technically be an NCAA violation that could jeopardize her eligibility (which is the topic of discussion in this thread.) It could easily be written off as an "actual and necessary expense of competition" though and it's likely these rules will change before she enters college anyways, so it's unlikely this will effect her if the NCAA ever discovered this. I don't know why clarifying the NCAA rules in a thread discussing them prompted such as strong response by you to the point of questioning how I "live my life like this", but you really need to take a chill pill and calm down.
I'm surprised that no one on this thread has looked into "Bylaw 12.5.2.3.3" which reads:
12.5.2.3.3 Promotional Contests. Receipt of a prize for winning an institutional or noninstitutional promotional activity (e.g., making a half-court basketball shot, being involved in a money scramble) by a prospective or enrolled student-athlete (or his or her family member) does not affect his or her eligibility, provided the prize is won through a random drawing in which all members of the general public or the student body are eligible to participate. (Revised: 1/9/96 effective 8/1/96, 3/25/05, 6/12/07)
Since the right to participate in Symmond's contest was 'random' (that is, she wasn't eligible on the basis of being a student athlete), and the event is clearly promotional in nature (i.e., it is designed to sell Run Gum), this bylaw would seem to apply. Note that skill events are not excluded, even to the extent that the skill is related to ability in an NCAA sport (e.g., the half-court contest).
I'm surprised that there aren't any actual NCAA compliance experts lurking on this thread that could confirm this suspicious.
Is there a rule against attaching a helium balloon to yourself while running a road race?
Am I living in the twilight zone? The Boston Marathon weather was terrible!
How rare is it to run a sub 5 minute mile AND bench press 225?
Move over Mark Coogan, Rojo and John Kellogg share their 3 favorite mile workouts
Mark Coogan says that if you could only do 3 workouts as a 1500m runner you should do these
Jakob Ingebrigtsen has a 1989 Ferrari 348 GTB and he's just put in paperwork to upgrade it