Looks like Missouri has a problem

[badger]

Lol I successfully got this thread off topic

Update onthe food sttker at MU, he grew up in a $1 million dollar mansion, his Dad makes $7 million a year as an executive at Union Pacific.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean daddy gives him a big allowance now that he's in grad school. Still, an interesting wrinkle in the protesting, isn't it?

Are you an adult at 18 or not?

It depends on if you play baseball, basketball, or football. Baseball, MLB, adult. Basketball, NBA not till 19 unless you're from another country, in which case 18, adult. Football, NFL at age 21 (ish, depending on how far removed from HS you are --- 3 years out is requirement) is adult.

Till then, you are an unpaid, scholarship amateur student-athlete.

[jkjsooner]

What are the long term consequences of this week's events?

At first I thought that this is a monumental power shift to the student athletes - well, those in revenue generating sports.

I do think there was a power shift but there are limits. Missouri players were able to do what they did because their demands had nothing to do with NCAA rules. If, say, they went on strike in an effort for pay (or ability to market their image), it would be a different matter. Nobody at Missouri would be able to give into their demands as doing so would be an NCAA violation. The NCAA wouldn't have the incentive to bend over backwards for one school.

If the players want power in NCAA matters, it will have to extend much further than one school.

[jkjsooner]

Lol I successfully got this thread off topic



Yeah, but that doesn't mean daddy gives him a big allowance now that he's in grad school. Still, an interesting wrinkle in the protesting, isn't it?


It depends on if you play baseball, basketball, or football. Baseball, MLB, adult. Basketball, NBA not till 19 unless you're from another country, in which case 18, adult. Football, NFL at age 21 (ish, depending on how far removed from HS you are --- 3 years out is requirement) is adult.

Till then, you are an unpaid, scholarship amateur student-athlete.

You are legally an adult at 18. You can sign contracts, go to war, vote, be charged as an adult in criminal matters (automatically), etc. It's a pet peeve of mind when people use one criteria - drinking - to define adulthood.

I say that because I went to a bar in Vegas when I was 19 and the sign on the door said "adults only". I remember thinking "FU I'm an adult" as I sat down for my meal with a soda.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Other areas where 18 years olds may be adults, legally, but are not trusted:

Car rental:
http://traveltips.usatoday.com/rent-...-25-61224.html
http://www.budget.com/budgetWeb/html...for%20renting?
https://www.hertz.com/rentacar/misc/...s_Under_25.jsp
http://www.smartertravel.com/travel-...tml?id=1262493

Hotels:
http://www.radisson.com/customerservice/policy/q4
http://www.hyatt.com/hyatt/help.jsp
http://www.omnihotels.com/reservations/faq
https://www.choicehotels.com/support/faq

[Tear Down This Wall]

Cigarettes:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...ything/281050/
http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opi...1_to_buy_butts
https://marksardella.wordpress.com/2...-in-wakefield/
http://www.wrex.com/story/27348274/2...garettes-to-21
http://khon2.com/2014/06/25/tobacco-...-21-next-week/
http://patch.com/new-york/huntington...bacco-products

[Tear Down This Wall]

Silicone breast implants, gotta be 22 for some due to FDA restrictions:
http://www.kirbyplasticsurgery.com/p...-augmentation/
http://www.littlerockcosmeticsurgery...ne-implants-2/
http://www.rehnkemd.com/?q=breast_implant_procedures
http://lexingtonps.com/pros-and-cons...east-implants/
http://www.bostonplastic.com/blog/su...reast-implant/

[Tear Down This Wall]

Many things you can't do - both public and private sector - even though you are 18 years old. And, again, that's a good thing.

U.S. Constitution...25 to be a member of House of Reps; 300 to be a Senator; 35 to be president.

Aw...it was the Founding Fathers who started all of this age restriction non-sense!

"What, I can vote but I can't be the president? What is this, Russia?"

[badger]

What are the long term consequences of this week's events?

Good thing to consider. At Mizzou itself, a change in leadership, a change in student policy and some hard self reflection for all.

Outside Mizzou, colleges and their football programs will once again be put on notice that player "strikes" and campus protests can happen anywhere. If yours is next, what will you do?

Soooo... any takers on guessing who will be next? I'll give it a shot:

The next movement to unionize: Stanford
The next athlete boycott due to substandard facilities: Ole Miss
The next football team to not practice due to campus incident: Texas A&M

[Tear Down This Wall]

Found many boat rental places that require you to be 25 before you can rent from them.

[Tear Down This Wall]

Many, many beach/ski resort places have age restrictions higher than 25.

Fred Schiffer wants you to be 30 to rent his place:
http://www.homeaway.com/vacation-rental/p328236

[jkjsooner]

Many things you can't do - both public and private sector - even though you are 18 years old. And, again, that's a good thing.

U.S. Constitution...25 to be a member of House of Reps; 300 to be a Senator; 35 to be president.

Aw...it was the Founding Fathers who started all of this age restriction non-sense!

"What, I can vote but I can't be the president? What is this, Russia?"

And since I mentioned Vegas, I should have also mentioned gambling.

[jkjsooner]

I was arguing with my brother last night. His argument was that 1) historical changes have come from times when people broke expected norms to fight for change and 2) had their concerns not been valid they players would not have risked the consequences and gone along with it.

As for #1, that may be true but it certainly doesn't validate any and all behaviors that don't conform to standards.

As for #2, I think he is ignoring the impulsive behavior of 18-22 year olds and mob mentality. I doubt many of them ever thought that there is a possibility of consequences, and there probably was never going to be a chance that they faced consequences. As for this proving the issue was very serious, I remember when I was in school the players refused to practice because they disagreed with the decision to play Cale Gundy instead of Steve Collins (or was it Tink?). It certainly was not an earth shattering issue.

[Tear Down This Wall]

I was arguing with my brother last night. His argument was that 1) historical changes have come from times when people broke expected norms to fight for change and 2) had their concerns not been valid they players would not have risked the consequences and gone along with it.

As for #1, that may be true but it certainly doesn't validate any and all behaviors that don't conform to standards.

As for #2, I think he is ignoring the impulsive behavior of 18-22 year olds and mob mentality. I doubt many of them ever thought that there is a possibility of consequences, and there probably was never going to be a chance that they faced consequences. As for this proving the issue was very serious, I remember when I was in school the players refused to practice because they disagreed with the decision to play Cale Gundy instead of Steve Collins (or was it Tink?). It certainly was not an earth shattering issue.

It was Steve. And, as much as I love Cale as a coach, Collins was playing better during that stretch when Gundy was injured. Thought then that Gibbs should have stuck with Collins.

[jkjsooner]

Good thing to consider. At Mizzou itself, a change in leadership, a change in student policy and some hard self reflection for all.

Outside Mizzou, colleges and their football programs will once again be put on notice that player "strikes" and campus protests can happen anywhere. If yours is next, what will you do?

Soooo... any takers on guessing who will be next? I'll give it a shot:

The next movement to unionize: Stanford
The next athlete boycott due to substandard facilities: Ole Miss
The next football team to not practice due to campus incident: Texas A&M

I just hope it's not OU. We certainly had a chance for a disaster when the chant became public.

Anyway, do you agree with my assertion that things won't be so simple if the grievance is related to an NCAA rule? Universities won't be able to give into those demands and short of a multi-university boycott the NCAA has no incentive to back down.

[badger]

Anyway, do you agree with my assertion that things won't be so simple if the grievance is related to an NCAA rule? Universities won't be able to give into those demands and short of a multi-university boycott the NCAA has no incentive to back down.

Well, my toddler can boycott naptime and bedtime as long as she wants, but it's not going to stop her from falling asleep eventually!

I was too young to remember, but the NFL players went on strike a few decades ago, but relented when the games kept being played without them. I think a similar thing would happen if the players from any number of schools decided to boycott to get change from the NCAA. There's more players out there not on scholarship that can replace you, just like there's more football players out there that replaced the NFL strikers.

What made the Mizzou strike/boycott/etc so effective was the timing. Someone compared the potential financial impact to a booster yanking a big donation without warning. Would an NCAA-wide boycott in the middle of the season by all players of all teams have the same impact? That would take a lot of time and effort... and thus, wouldn't happen

[BoulderSooner79]

Stanford the next school to attempt to unionize? I don't think so. The tall landmark on campus is Hoover Tower (we called it Hoover's last erection when I was there). I could see a start-up football team forming to challenge the legacy team - that's what we do in silicon valley.

[Tear Down This Wall]

If it comes to that - players who are going to school with their tuition paid, books paid, room and board, plus stipend boycotting or walking out - it will be the day we quit our season tickets.

Life is too short to put money into kids who don't understand or appreciate what is being handed to them on a silver platter.

It won't be too long. Our own Adrian Peterson equating the players to slaves should, really, have been a wake up call to most of us. Slaves rarely made $12 million+ per year. On the collegiate level, most slaves weren't given the opportunity to have a paid-for college education.

Something has unraveled over the past generation of athletes: appreciation for the opportunity to get for free what many student have to work multiple jobs for and/or borrow to go into debt through student loans for.

[ouflak]

If it comes to that - players who are going to school with their tuition paid, books paid, room and board, plus stipend boycotting or walking out - it will be the day we quit our season tickets.

That would certainly hurt profits.

Life is too short to put money into kids who don't understand or appreciate what is being handed to them on a silver platter.

Then why can a kid go right into baseball after high school and make millions? Or Hockey? Why can a kid, after waiting only one year after high school, go straight to the NBA? Are the kids who play these sports somehow more mentally mature and capable of handling all of that money than football players who have to wait 3 years?

It won't be too long. Our own Adrian Peterson equating the players to slaves should, really, have been a wake up call to most of us. Slaves rarely made $12 million+ per year. On the collegiate level, most slaves weren't given the opportunity to have a paid-for college education.

You shouldn't literally take what he said to mean the actual institution of slavery. I think that his comparison was meant on a level of who is making money versus who is actually doing the work to make the money. The disparity that exists now in college sports clearly has parallels. No one can deny that.

Something has unraveled over the past generation of athletes:

I agree completely. There was a time when a tenured professor made more than any of the sports head coaches. There was no such thing as Tier-Anything, and not every single aspect of the sports was 'monetized'. Now? You have coaches making more than all of the tenured professors on campus and probably the governor of that state as well *combined*. Throw into that the yearly 6 figure raises, not to mention the regular 5 figure raises for all of the assistants, ironically most of that paid by schools whose athletic budgets are supposedly in the red. Merchandisers ink hundred million dollar deals with the school and make billions. Broadcasters can barely find room on the bank computer hard drives to store all of the money they are pulling in. Athletic directors and Conference commissioners make half a million or more with buyouts into millions. The NCAA makes sure its execs and staff are among the best paid of any 'non-profit' organization ever to exist. The world of college athletics has changed and the tsunami of money just keeps rolling on in. What is the one thing that has stayed the same? The athletes are still getting the exact same scholarship. They are the ones sacrificing their bodies, sometimes their educations (a distraction from their sport), even occasionally their lives, and arguably even their souls (from the long-term effects of concussions) for all of that money. And no one can say it hasn't been worth it. It's grown into a multi-billion dollar industry. Their efforts have paid off. Just not for them.

... appreciation for the opportunity to get for free what many student have to work multiple jobs for and/or borrow to go into debt through student loans for.

I assume you are talking about the scholarship athletes? Because a large percentage are not on any athletic scholarship of any kind. Yet they are still bound by the exact same rules. They are even not allowed to work full-time jobs as this would distract them from putting their efforts into the real money maker, the sports.

I went to school on an academic scholarship and I worked for a professor on a research project. Despite that I still could:

1. Work full time at any job if wanted or needed (which I did).
2. Transfer to another school, on scholarship, and do the exact same kind of work research work
3. Sell my image and name as I saw fit.

If the athletes across the country decide to go on strike, the NCAA had better be prepared to do one of two things:

1. Go bankrupt
2. Start paying up.

I personally am rooting for the NCAA to fight to the bitter end, because that will surely mean that they cease to exist as a result.

[Jacie]

Concerning kids playing baseball and hockey long before they are allowed to go pro in football, both of those sports have extensive farm systems for young players. Rarely in baseball and practically never in hockey do you see one going to the top right of high school.

[ouflak]

Concerning kids playing baseball and hockey long before they are allowed to go pro in football, both of those sports have extensive farm systems for young players. Rarely in baseball and practically never in hockey do you see one going to the top right of high school.

There aren't any restrictions in these sports on such a thing happening though. There wasn't even the NBA one year restriction until a few years ago, hence why Kobe Bryant was able to join the league at 18 out of high school. An extensive farm system doesn't seem like a valid reason to have such restrictions. Tennis players can start making millions in their young teens and many girls have done just that and are doing that now. Sorry not buying it. The reason for these restrictions has to do with money, and not farm systems or the nonsense argument that the 'kids are too young' to know what to do with all that money.