Mizzou Player Strike

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by bob

Probably the wrong place to post this, but soccer isn't free of the concussion concerns...

U.S. Soccer Bans Headers For Players Under 11 To Resolve Concussion Lawsuit

Heh.

The stages of evolution:

Stage 1: Develop enough cultural sophistication that your species derives pleasure from games in which people repeatedly bash their skulls into things.

Stage 2: Decide to stop bashing your skulls into things.

Stage 3: Colonize Mars.

[bob]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Only a very few survive without subsidies from tuition or student fees. There's a USAToday database that tracks the amount of subsidies for all D1 schools.

So I would be correct in saying no athletic money is flowing back into academics (ignore donations that may not occur if athletics didn't keep alumni invested in their university), right?

[JPhillips]

I can't answer that definitively, but if it's happening at all it certainly isn't common.

[Dutch]

I've only heard a lot of insinuation that the sports departments keep everything. Wouldn't it be a fantastic inclusion and sense of purpose for athletes to here something like, "The University of Texas Football program raised enough money to offer 250 new scholarships and had enough leftover to build a new wing of the Science Department for additional R&D Laboratories."?

I dont think that is what actually happens with that money though. More like new gym equipment and even more expensive coaching staffs.

But I admit, I'm talking out of my ass on that one...I went to night school....

[molson]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Only a very few survive without subsidies from tuition or student fees. There's a USAToday database that tracks the amount of subsidies for all D1 schools.

They'd survive. A few might have to cut down a smidgen on expenses. But subsidies aren't a huge part of schools' revenue.

Take South Carolina. They take in $98 million in revenue. They have $92 million in expenses. They get $5 million in subsidies. I think they could "survive" on $98 million even if they had to cut the budget by 5%. Maybe the next coach wouldn't have to make $4+ million a year.

NCAA | Finances | USA TODAY Sports

There is a ton of money coming into these schools from TV rights and licensing. I'm not quite sure where all of it goes, or what the minimum level they need to survive is, but I think they'll be all right.

Edit: Maybe you're talking about the lower-level non-BCS schools. I'm not sure why Memphis needs $50 million to run a football program, but I suspect whatever they're given, they're happy to spend.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by molson

They'd survive. A few might have to cut down a smidgen on expenses. But subsidies aren't a huge part of schools' revenue.

Take South Carolina. They take in $98 million in revenue. They have $92 million in expenses. They get $5 million in subsidies. I think they could "survive" on $98 million even if they had to cut the budget by 5%. Maybe the next coach wouldn't have to make $4+ million a year.

NCAA | Finances | USA TODAY Sports

There is a ton of money coming into these schools from TV rights and licensing. I'm not quite sure where all of it goes, or what the minimum level they need to survive is, but I think they'll be all right.

Sure. I was only saying that as it stands few of them are independent of subsidies.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by bob

So I would be correct in saying no athletic money is flowing back into academics (ignore donations that may not occur if athletics didn't keep alumni invested in their university), right?

The big money football and basketball teams take the revenues that come in, and fund football/basketball facilities, coaching staffs, recruiting budgets, player amenities, and then fund non-revenue sports pretty much in that order. A lot of schools have 20+ non-revenue athletic programs that don't even come close to covering expenses.

[CraigSca]

Originally Posted by Logan

The big money football and basketball teams take the revenues that come in, and fund football/basketball facilities, coaching staffs, recruiting budgets, player amenities, and then fund non-revenue sports pretty much in that order. A lot of schools have 20+ non-revenue athletic programs that don't even come close to covering expenses.

Right, and the majority of that money comes from TV $$$ (as well as donors funding athletics). While the players are the product, the only reason they are a product is because they're tied to their institution. Without the institutional tie-in, no one would give a flying.

Wasn't there a barnstorming tour during the baseball strike, or an attempt to do so? No one cared. Seriously, strip away the city tie-in in any sport and I don't think anyone would care anymore.

[wustin]

Chancellor resigned too iirc.

I wonder if the school will assign a non-white puppet as the interim president just to appease the students.

[digamma]

Also, in the grand scheme of things, the athletics budget is pretty small compared to the overall university budget. For example, Minnesota has a top 25 athletic program in terms of revenue. They have made a small profit in the athletic department the last two years. The athletics budget is about 2% of the overall university budget. Most university revenue comes from tuition (the athletic department reimburses athletic scholarships) and grants.

The other thing I'd say is that it is my opinion that the underlying cause matters. This may have been a perfect storm. I'm as fascinated as anyone to see what happens now, but we've seen a couple of instances where athletes have tried to organize around issues that affect only them (I'm thinking of All Players United and the Northwestern unionization effort) and they both failed pretty miserably. You have to get buy in from the outside. I think that either comes from it being a broader social issue or a domino toppling at a rival school (Auburn wants to beat Alabama regardless of whether the athletes are fast or slow or white, black or purple). It will be interesting to see if the latter happens.

[NobodyHere]

You stay classy Missouri students

[Dutch]

That's some 1950's shit right there.

[TroyF]

As someone with a journalism background, this makes my stomach turn. To call it sickening would be an understatement. Free speech means you can state your opinion. It does not mean you can silence others opinions and it damned well does not mean you can prevent the press from covering a public event.

I'm a hell of a lot more leniant than these people are. Were I in charge, I would not demand her resignation. I would demand that she speak up and admit how horribly illegal and wrong her actions were.

What a trainwreck.

[CU Tiger]

There are 3 University employees in the video. 2 professors, including the lady calling for muscle at the end.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by CraigSca

Right, and the majority of that money comes from TV $$$ (as well as donors funding athletics). While the players are the product, the only reason they are a product is because they're tied to their institution. Without the institutional tie-in, no one would give a flying.

Wasn't there a barnstorming tour during the baseball strike, or an attempt to do so? No one cared. Seriously, strip away the city tie-in in any sport and I don't think anyone would care anymore.

I'm not sure I'd go that far, but I would also have to agree that it plays a major part and a true minor league system would never be as successful. The question though is, how close could it be initially and over what time frame could it potentially grow? The problem with equating it to the baseball minor league system is that the levels are so diverse and the players move between them so frequently, you really don't get the same effect as you likely could in football if you had the players sticking with the same local minor league team for a few years.

[BishopMVP]

As for athletes breaking off to start a minor league, I'm not sure why everyone treats it as a mutually exclusive proposition. Hockey (and I guess Soccer and even basketball to a slight extent) show you can simultaneously have some kids getting paid and some who choose to go the college route. I think basketball, whether it grows upwards from the AAU programs (god I hope not), or comes from the D-League lowering its age minimum, will be the first step well before football. The amount of infrastructure required to start a football league without the NFL's support is just way too much for it to be viable at this time.

Originally Posted by nol

Abe covered it pretty well on the first page as far as how a lack of a timely response to something as high-profile as the swastika (especially when coupled with prior complaints) implies that the president was either extremely apathetic or incompetent. Either of those things, despite having no bearing on whether he's actually a nice guy or means well or whatever, makes for a legitimate cause to want a different university president in place.



Even in that case, it's still a clear indicator that there is someone on campus who is an absolute psycho and a threat to campus safety who should be addressed. This kind of response is what really drives home how ineffectual the "no the real problem is mental health" response is whenever a school shooting occurs. People don't just jump directly to making a shit swastika; they have clearly demonstrated several signs of being mentally unbalanced in the past. We live in a society where someone like the South Carolina shooter, who was going the whole nine yards and wearing Rhodesia jackets, was just considered "a slightly odd duck who really liked the South a lot" beforehand because *that* kind of behavior isn't that out of line compared to society at large.

This is where I'd actually need to do more reading than I want to. A) what action was taken? I assume they found the perpetrator and kicked them out of campus housing at the least, if not the university. I'm sure Abe can say more, but especially if it was a mental health issue you start getting into privacy rules about what you can publicly say about it. And same as Dutch, my question B) is is a statement from the President necessary? At UMass, kids got kicked out of housing by their dorms RD and Campus Housing - I can't recall ever hearing the President getting involved.

I can agree the President was incredibly tone deaf, and a college campus should be a leader in fighting racism around town, but I haven't seen evidence the swastika was even tied in to black people. And if action was taken behind the scenes, but just not announced, I am kind of on his side. It certainly didn't appear from their list of demands, tactics, or the video of them harassing a student photographer up thread that they were interested in a dialogue or getting all the facts out there. So I'm glad these stunts brought an issue to greater awareness, but I'm not sure FIRE THE PRESIDENT was the answer over work with the President.

Originally Posted by bob

While watching this, all i could think of was the Safe Space episode of South Park. Where is Reality?

Protestors literally had signs saying Safe Space up... I don't know if any of them are in on the joke, but it wouldn't shock me if there was some pranksters doing that at the start, then the idiot protestor fringe latched on to it. I guess that ginger professor at the end was a UMass grad student during some of my undergrad years, wouldn't surprise me if she was one of our 3-8 idiot serial protestors at that time.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

You stay classy Missouri students

Shouldn't all the state employees who infringed on the constitutional rights of that guy be fired? I mean your school is known for journalism for christ sake.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by molson

Universities don't have to pay themselves, they could open the door up to booster benefits, commercial endorsements, and outside employment.

This makes the most sense and I have no idea why it doesn't take place already. Doesn't cost the schools a dime.

Also, athletic departments survived just fine without monster TV contracts back in the day. Lower levels of college sports (D2, D3) are able to maintain an athletic department with little to no revenue.

And if you're going to limit what the athletes can make, you should do the same for the coaching staff. Pay them what a professor would make.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Shouldn't all the state employees who infringed on the constitutional rights of that guy be fired? I mean your school is known for journalism for christ sake.

Even worse, I guess she was part of the J-school too. Twitter

And if you're going to limit what the athletes can make, you should do the same for the coaching staff. Pay them what a professor would make.

The guy was a complete asshole, but I loved Jim Calhoun's response when his salary was questioned. Jim Calhoun Freaks Out on A Reporter Bill O'Reilly Style! (2/21/09) - YouTube

Same reason you can't ever have a definitive answer on what college athletics are worth, because its not just gate receipts and TV contracts it's also branding and name recognition. Without football, Notre Dame is Wabash or Oberlin. UMass is the flagship state university, and we get some nice little pub when a professor wins a Nobel Prize or a graduate like Jack Welch gets some recognition. Yet it was when Calipari was there that the state legislature was fully funding it and pouring money into campus construction. If he would take $20 million to come back that would still be a net gain for us.

[RainMaker]

Without good football players Notre Dame is Wabash and Oberlin too. The same argument you're making for Calipari getting $20 million to come back is the same argument to pay the best high school prospects in the country to come to your school.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

This makes the most sense and I have no idea why it doesn't take place already. Doesn't cost the schools a dime.

So the athlete's scholarship becomes taxable income then?

Every time this discussion comes up the ideas thrown around are trying to create a system that's there to take care of the less than 2% of athletes with professional futures. You do realize the vast majority of athletes are there to utilize their scholarship to get an education? There's a very small number of athletes that break the system and cause problems. Reinventing the wheel to take care of them doesn't make sense.

Athletes get a scholarship, professional instruction and training, and marketing from their university. Tim Tebow isn't a 1st round pick if he plays at UCF instead of UF. Todd Gurley certainly isn't a 1st round pick coming off an ACL injury if he played at Georgia Southern instead of UGA.

There are better ways to help ALL athletes rather than making sure the very top athletes have money in the pockets. Instead of talking about ways to make these players rich before they leave college the discussion should be about better healthcare/benefits for players that have health issues after finishing school.

[RainMaker]

I'm not talking about athletic scholarships. Nothing would change in that regard at all. I'm saying that players should be able to earn income on their own like every other adult on this planet. I had an academic scholarship when I went to school and was allowed to work wherever I wanted for whatever I could make.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Every time this discussion comes up the ideas thrown around are trying to create a system that's there to take care of the less than 2% of athletes with professional futures. You do realize the vast majority of athletes are there to utilize their scholarship to get an education? There's a very small number of athletes that break the system and cause problems. Reinventing the wheel to take care of them doesn't make sense.

College football programs will pull in more than $3.5 billion in revenues this year. That's not because only 2% of players have professional futures. And I disagree on a "vast majority" being there to utilize scholarships for education unless we're talking all athletes across sports, and I doubt it's anything close to a vast majority if we're just talking P5 football schools and/or major college basketball. Do a good portion put in the work necessary and plan on utilizing their education at some point? Sure. But damn near every P5 recruit thinks he's good enough to play in the NFL and that is their primary motivation.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Logan

College football programs will pull in more than $3.5 billion in revenues this year. That's not because only 2% of players have professional futures. And I disagree on a "vast majority" being there to utilize scholarships for education unless we're talking all athletes across sports, and I doubt it's anything close to a vast majority if we're just talking P5 football schools and/or major college basketball. Do a good portion put in the work necessary and plan on utilizing their education at some point? Sure. But damn near every P5 recruit thinks he's good enough to play in the NFL and that is their primary motivation.

There are sports other than football and basketball. They may not be revenue generating, but I don't see how something that's put in place to pay football and basketball players wouldn't have to cover all athletes, both men and women.

Yes, the vast majority of scholarship athletes covering all D-1 schools are primarily there for an education.

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm not talking about athletic scholarships. Nothing would change in that regard at all. I'm saying that players should be able to earn income on their own like every other adult on this planet. I had an academic scholarship when I went to school and was allowed to work wherever I wanted for whatever I could make.

When you're talking booster benefits you're potentially crossing over into university employee.

Athletes don't have it easy with the hours they're putting in, but they do have access to money to make things a bit easier. Cost of Attendance will be starting soon and that's $2-$5 thousand a year depending on the school, off campus room and board is covered, The Special Assistance Fund can cover plane tickets over holidays, the Student Athlete Opportunity Fund is a pool of money provided by the NCAA to cover a large number of needs, and a large number of athletes qualify for Pell Grants like any other student.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Atocep

There are sports other than football and basketball. They may not be revenue generating, but I don't see how something that's put in place to pay football and basketball players wouldn't have to cover all athletes, both men and women.

Yes, the vast majority of scholarship athletes covering all D-1 schools are primarily there for an education.

Well yeah, that's the problem. If you're only willing to put everyone in one bucket, you're not going to fix anything.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Atocep

There are sports other than football and basketball. They may not be revenue generating, but I don't see how something that's put in place to pay football and basketball players wouldn't have to cover all athletes, both men and women.

Hahaha, I hadn't even thought of that angle. If a school attempts to pay football players would they also have to pay an equal number of female crew, track, and swimming athletes to satisfy Title IX? Or would a school finally have the balls to argue that Title IX was amazing, and is probably still necessary, but football should absolutely be exempted from it.

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Hahaha, I hadn't even thought of that angle. If a school attempts to pay football players would they also have to pay an equal number of female crew, track, and swimming athletes to satisfy Title IX? Or would a school finally have the balls to argue that Title IX was amazing, and is probably still necessary, but football should absolutely be exempted from it.

Schools won't be able to get away from Title IX...they will be forced to match dollar for dollar what is given out to men for the female athletes. Moreover, they will likely be required to provide the same monitary benefit to non-revenue sport athletes that they offer football and basketball players.

Ultimately, this will lead to more of what we saw when title IX first went into effect - colleges will cancel many non-revenue sports. In fact, we are already starting to see it...you may not be aware but due to my kids I'm very involved in the swim world, and I can tell you that several schools have recently dropped their swim programs. Swimming is a pretty large team for a non-revenue sport and it can be an expensive sport as well (especially if the team's competition pool is maintainted by the university and not the county/city government). Schools have basically admitted they aren't willing to pay for that sport, and behind the scenes they have told club coaches that they fear the additional costs of these benefits times the number of swimmers on the team.

In fact, club coaches are really pushing USA Swimming and other organizations to urge unversities not to drop swim teams as a result of the increased funds that will be required for football and basketball.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Breeze

Schools won't be able to get away from Title IX...they will be forced to match dollar for dollar what is given out to men for the female athletes.

I coach boys lacrosse, so I'm well aware of the deleterious effects of Title IX on male non-revenue sports, although in our case it's that D1 growth severely lagged behind HS/youth growth rather than cutting existing programs like baseball, wrestling, I guess swimming now too. (And fwiw, if you're talking about pool costs etc that's not a Title IX issue, because the pool would presumably cost just as much to maintain whether you had just a women's team or both, and having a women's swim team is a big offset that helps Title IX numbers. The problems brought on by paying every scholarship athlete a stipend and Title IX are separate issues, although often conflated, even by the administrators when it provides effective cover for what are really cost-cutting measures. A.k.a. if they cut just Men's swimming, that's on Title IX, but if they cut both Men's and Women's Swimming that's on the university.)

The thing is if you actually read Title IX it never sets quotas like people assume, it just talks about providing equal opportunities to those who want them. Any survey ever done on college campuses shows that more males than females want to play a college sport, so I think a judge would buy the idea that there can be a 55/45 or 60/40 split, but no one has the balls to argue it. Just have to wait until there's a radical masculinist wing of protestors I guess. (and the way protest culture is trending it wouldn't shock me if they started popping up sooner or later. )

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

(And fwiw, if you're talking about pool costs etc that's not a Title IX issue...)

Sorry, didn't mean to imply the cost of the pool was a Title IX issue, just that it is another significant expense when fielding a swim team, and the budget for a swim team would only further increase with the new benefits. Because of the overall costs of having a team it becomes an easy target when trying to eliminate expenses.

Also, you are probably right in that many schools will only drop the men's team. They will need the women's team to help balance the football scholarships.

[BishopMVP]

So the news from UM today involves the student body president spreading false rumors about the KKK being on campus, the typical 4chan nutjobs coming in and posting threats (and being arrested), and what seems like a pretty respected professor resigning when people were mad he wouldn't cancel class because there were no credible threats, and canceling it would let the bullies win.

Oh, and the poop swastika possibly never happened, because the only evidence anyone has tried to produce so far is a photo posted to reddit a year ago. Again it shouldn't detract from the larger issues, but like I said initially that never made sense and seemed a really weird issue to be going after the President for.

(Also the hunger strike kid's father is a multi-millionaire, but that should be irrelevant. Unlike the idiot at Yale screaming WHO HIRED YOU at the professor where it turns out she was on the search committee. That one's hilarious, or would be if it weren't so tragic.)

Originally Posted by Breeze

Sorry, didn't mean to imply the cost of the pool was a Title IX issue, just that it is another significant expense when fielding a swim team, and the budget for a swim team would only further increase with the new benefits. Because of the overall costs of having a team it becomes an easy target when trying to eliminate expenses.

Also, you are probably right in that many schools will only drop the men's team. They will need the women's team to help balance the football scholarships.

Yeah, I've just had this argument a whole lot before Fwiw, in the end the answer ended up being that wealthy alums or parents literally donated enough to start up programs, and now it's spread to endowing programs as a whole. As much as I hate the stereotypes it brings, being a sport played by a lot of wealthy elitists does have its benefits.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I'm not talking about athletic scholarships. Nothing would change in that regard at all. I'm saying that players should be able to earn income on their own like every other adult on this planet. I had an academic scholarship when I went to school and was allowed to work wherever I wanted for whatever I could make.

Athletes are allowed to work as well. Now finding time probably isnt easy but there is no rule preventing a college athlete from being gainfully employed so long as his pay is not bolstered by his athletic status.

[wustin]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

So the news from UM today involves the student body president spreading false rumors about the KKK being on campus, the typical 4chan nutjobs coming in and posting threats (and being arrested), and what seems like a pretty respected professor resigning when people were mad he wouldn't cancel class because there were no credible threats, and canceling it would let the bullies win.

Pretty sure he resigned because he was disgusted of the administration and the students. Mizzou is a sinking ship at this point.

I really find it hilarious how ironic all this protest is happening against the faculty. Remember The New Left from the 1960s? This is like The New New Left. It's come full circle and I wonder if this is gonna happen again in another half century.

Edit: The professor who resigned.

[Solecismic]

I'm trying to have sympathy for the faculty at Missouri and Yale, but I just can't.

They brought this on completely on their own. This is the world they wanted, and now they have it.

I'll add that in many universities, faculty is trying very hard to reduce administrative bloat, which leads to higher tuition and this kind of environment. But administration tends to feed upon itself and once bloated, there's really no stopping it.

[Abe Sargent]

Here's me!


http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/Show...jsp?tid=781110

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

Here's me!


Abe Sargent at Eastern Michigan University - RateMyProfessors.com

Love the 2.9 for easiness. PS "Don't sleep in this class. Thats all I gotta say." Well now I'm intrigued!

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by Abe Sargent

Here's me!


Abe Sargent at Eastern Michigan University - RateMyProfessors.com

So how much do professors care about sites like that?

I'll admit that as a student they do have some influence on what classes I take.

[Dutch]

Wow, was the whole thing a sham???

Is the entire Mizzou Protest Based on Lies? | FOX Sports

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So how much do professors care about sites like that?

I'll admit that as a student they do have some influence on what classes I take.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I pay no attention to rating sites. The sample size is so small that it makes the data useless. Only a handful of people that love you or hate you will be motivated enough to fill out one of those surveys.

[muns]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

I'm trying to have sympathy for the faculty at Missouri and Yale, but I just can't.

They brought this on completely on their own. This is the world they wanted, and now they have it.

I'll add that in many universities, faculty is trying very hard to reduce administrative bloat, which leads to higher tuition and this kind of environment. But administration tends to feed upon itself and once bloated, there's really no stopping it.

Ill add this side of the coin since I am apart of the administrative side of a University now. Faculty think that the University is all about academics and things run around their classes, when in fact students spend much less than half of their time doing classes and academic things (things faculty don't want to hear or help out with). When you have students showing up with more and more problems (I.E. mental health, behavioral issues) that bloat is needed because its a lawsuit waiting to happen when issues go unchecked.

[Abe Sargent]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

So how much do professors care about sites like that?

I'll admit that as a student they do have some influence on what classes I take.

If they are going for tenure? A massive amount

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Wow, was the whole thing a sham???

Is the entire Mizzou Protest Based on Lies? | FOX Sports

I love columnists that complain about the lack of reporting on a subject.

What's stopping you, champ!

[wustin]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Wow, was the whole thing a sham???

Is the entire Mizzou Protest Based on Lies? | FOX Sports

I don't know about sham, but there's a lot of anecdotal evidence.

There are probably instances of these incidents occurring on campus every day or week perhaps but they never get reported immediately and I'm sure most people would agree one is too many. But life is not fair and it's not gonna be fair and this whole fiasco did not need to be taken this far.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Athletes are allowed to work as well. Now finding time probably isnt easy but there is no rule preventing a college athlete from being gainfully employed so long as his pay is not bolstered by his athletic status.

Why does it matter if his pay is bolstered by his athletic status? That's like telling a student applying for a job that he can't mention he's majoring in Biology and has a 3.8 GPA.

I guess I don't understand why you would care what private agreement a college student enters into with another private party?

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Wow, was the whole thing a sham???

Is the entire Mizzou Protest Based on Lies? | FOX Sports

Some of it seems to be based on lies. Some of it seems legit. I still don't know what the expectation was of the President.

Take the poop swastika. First, there is no proof it was some racist taunt. It's more likely to be some drunken prank by an idiot college kid. Is the President supposed to take DNA samples from everyone on campus to sort this crime out? What was the expectation here and how many resources were expected to be used on this? And some of the other complaints come from proven liars.

I kept waiting for the big story to break about systemic racism at the school. I still can't figure out what the issue is. Seems more like some opportunistic people are pushing an agenda to gain social justice fame. I can't blame them I guess since activism is big business these days. But for everyone else at Missouri, congrats on making your school look like a joke.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Why does it matter if his pay is bolstered by his athletic status? That's like telling a student applying for a job that he can't mention he's majoring in Biology and has a 3.8 GPA.

I guess I don't understand why you would care what private agreement a college student enters into with another private party?

I don't think anyone would care until the player is ruled ineligible for those extra benefits. So change the rules.

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

I can't blame them I guess since activism is big business these days.

How is activism big business these days? I'd like to know how I can get a piece of the pie.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

How is activism big business these days? I'd like to know how I can get a piece of the pie.

I need to create some sort of activism app

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

How is activism big business these days? I'd like to know how I can get a piece of the pie.

Tons of sites and media organizations you can write for. Activism is huge for bringing in clicks. You can get hired at Think Tanks and Policy Centers. Charge big bucks for speaking gigs. Write some books. And even get hired for a cushy job at a University.

Activism has turned into a form of entertainment for people. There are smart people at the top who have figured this out and are cashing in.

[Kodos]

This is why we need a more socialist President. Curse you, capitalism!

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I love columnists that complain about the lack of reporting on a subject.

What's stopping you, champ!

Well at Mizzou it would be the student body and some low-life professors.