Pollard on Deadspin
- Thread starter HILL
- Start date
The only sport that has a large minor league program is baseball. Every year each MLB team probably signs 20-25 high school players. Maybe 2-3 eventually make the majors and maybe one has a long, big money MLB career. The vast majority never make the majors. Contrast 2 players. One who signs out of high school, plays 6 years of minor league ball and then is released. A second player who plays 4 years of college baseball, then spends 2 years in the minors and is released. I'm sure player 2 is much better off in the long run. Player 1 would have made more money overall, but minor league pay is pretty small and unless he was a very high draft choice with a big bonus he probably has none of that money left. Player 2 at least has the education to start a career.
I don't think college baseball is a good analogy. Talented players go into college teams and the farm system. If you're smart enough to handle school, you go to college ball. If you're not, you go to a farm system. The talent pool is pretty similar, and the development is also similar.
Your opinion is laughable. Sorry, but nobody is giving up the experience of a real college campus for four years so that they can take virtual classes from their basements. The experience of college outside of class is every bit as valuable as the classes themselves.
I disagree. I am not saying paying athletes is the answer, but the ridiculous salaries of coaches, AD's and execs are making is a joke. Let's not act like the money is not there.
Which is a great argument for why true farm systems (not the D-League, not the Arena League) are a good way to go. But it would greatly diminish the popularity of college football.
Why would it? Pollards opinion is not going to influence whether he has to pay college athletes in the near future. Either everyone will have to do it or nobody. I don't see the argument that thinks this would influence a recruit's decision.
Exactly my point. It's the right thing to do, but universities will fight it tooth and nail because they can't afford to lose the revenue.
I just realized that the title of this thread doesn't make any sense. It should be Deadspin on Pollard. Pollard isn't commenting on Deadspin.
The only viable way to be a vet is to go to vet school, they work in the clinic do research for grants etc. And they pay to do it. I see it as a hell of an opportunity. That said I am fine with schollies and with a cost of living allowance for the mens and womens bball and football and vollyball. Its not like all sports are equal now. Some are head count, some get less scholarships some have total schollies so have partials like wrestling. Football is year round as is bball. Not that big a deal. Up it 2k a year per scholly thats 272k (roughly 136 schollies) a year more for each school and would give kids $200 a month for the 10 months they are on campus. Make it just for the division 1.
"Pollard Featured on Deadspin"
OR
"Did you see Polard on Deadspin"
OR
"Hey guys, Pollard's picture is on Deadspin"
Make more sense?
The media looks at this through a football only lense. The whole state of college football is really awful and controlled by to few. The sport is getting mass attention these days because it is all over the TV but the product sucks. The leagues suck, the bowls suck, the spending race sucks, the lack of equality sucks. I love college football but I think the glory days of college football being college football are long long gone.
Mo Money Mo Problems .............. Right now lotta problems and no solution excpept to kicks people out so fewer people can have mo mo money and mo mo problems.
Rant over go JP!!
Mo Money Mo Problems .............. Right now lotta problems and no solution excpept to kicks people out so fewer people can have mo mo money and mo mo problems.
Rant over go JP!!
Dont tell TXCyclones that....he is already feeling the wrath on the recruiting trail.
He is entitled to his point of view and I think his position is fairly well reasoned. However, he probably isn't the person who should be putting this out there.
What do mean when you refer to the lack of "equality"? If you are referring to parity, then I would argue things are more "equal" than they have ever been.
