Arnett

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turfdawg67

Ok... wow! After one game as a head coach. Ummm, hope you're right...

I hope I'm right too, but from what I'm hearing he has very similar traits to both of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turfdawg67

And to think I clicked on a post titled "Arnett".

https://media.tenor.com/15ilRsMsX_oA...tcha-bitch.gif

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tater

The problem is you bought the lie that is amateur sports.

If it truly is amateur, then the colleges shouldn't be making surplus money off of it. College football is a business. In an ideal world it's not, but in the real world it is.

As such, the free market dictates businesses should pay employees market wages or get poached. There's not a debate for you to stand on. This is cut and dry.

I haven't bought any lie. I am just stating what should be vs what is. Yes what is is a large money moving operation. It takes a lot of money to support it and it brings in a lot.

What it started out and should be is something different which is my point. These things don't happen over night but they progress worse and worse over time. Here is what I mean.

For the free market crowd. I am full free market with guiderails as everything must have guiderails because we all are flawed and make selfish unfair choices.

College kids are not in the free market yet. They are not in school to earn a living. They are in school to learn and prepare to make a living. Once you leave school you are now in the free market to choose what you do, how much you earn, etc. We got hoards of people that don't understand this. Athletes and all students all get a chance to work for an education to better their livelihood situation - again which comes after the education. The education system was never intended to be the free market for students themselves.

Part of making the education fun for young students is offering sports to those select few and the free education that most would never have a chance to get. The goal again is to better their life not enter pro sports. 99+% never have any career in pro sports and almost none make enough to live off of forever. So again the goal is to educate and give some a better chance. It ain't about making them rich in college and no one is being taken advantage of unless they don't get their education.

The NCAA sought to make college athletics fair so competition was good between all schools. This too eroded by bad rules (remember Bama getting all the players in the day and scholarship limits were done to even up the competition). Same thing now but NCAA threw in the towel to all the woke whinning about mistreatment. Also remind you that these IHL are funded by the state tax dollars and thus none of their money can be paid to athletes just like in high school. This is whi NIL ended up separate like it did. State Universities are different like it or not.

So applying free market to today's as is - there is no need to beat people up for not giving to NIL. Shutup and let the free market take care of it. If it is as great as some think, it will take care of itself. So go ahead and give your discretionary dollars to NIL and see what great return they provide. There ain't enough money to pass around to every player to stay at every school and in the end, not much changes. Good luck with that.

After all that, no one follows or cares about laws or rules today in anything which is what grates me the most. Relative truth applied to everything is the rule of the day. Same group that says the 10 commandments don't apply now or the Constitution is out dated so we can't go by it.

Is NIL money given to the athlete in one lump sum, weekly or monthly? what tax do they pay on the income?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pancho

Is NIL money given to the athlete in one lump sum, weekly or monthly? what tax do they pay on the income?

In installments.
Depends on the tax bracket. Have to be careful with Pell grants too. The income can put them over the threshold to qualify for a grant