The Fab 5 on ESPN

• WebFire

  KR1245;712085 wrote:eh, I thought it was OK
  
  I agree with the guys on The Fan. The first part of it was pretty entertaining, the second part seemed like an infomercial. I dont need to hear the "should student athletes gets paid" argument anymore. These kids knew what they were getting into.

  
  I agree. And I don't feel bad for the Fab 5 either. That's what college is. It enables you to get to the next level, if you have that skill.
• friendfromlowry

  KR1245;712085 wrote:I dont need to hear the "should student athletes gets paid" argument anymore. These kids knew what they were getting into.

  
  Exactly. Guys like Chris Webber go to "college" for two years and have to be dirt poor during it but then afterwards they go to the NBA and probably never have to worry about another dime. Meanwhile, most college students will graduate with a considerable amount of debt that will require years to pay off. So yeah, it's hard to sit here and feel sorry for them.
  I respect Rose for coming on the show and being open (especially since Webber wouldn't be bothered with it) but at one point he was saying how yeah they all played beerpong and video games and went to parties, but the difference was the next day they woke up and went to practice.
• KR1245

  

  ccrunner609;712162 wrote:I beg to differ....you have to remember this was the era that started the shoe deals and the jersey sales. just a few years before their time Michigan was making $1.5 million in sports royalties and after they were making $10.5 million during and after.

  
  I understand that and I understand the argument. I just didnt want to hear about it during the show. Thats how college athletics work, its not like the Fab Five were the first group of kids looking for a payday.
• WebFire

  KR1245;712179 wrote:I understand that and I understand the argument. I just didnt want to hear about it during the show. Thats how college athletics work, its not like the Fab Five were the first group of kids looking for a payday.

  
  Agree again. I get what you are saying CC, but that doesn't change the fact that college players do not get paid. They didn't then, and 20 years later they still don't. I don't believe they should either.
  
  They have to realize that college was the first step in building them in to the marketing monsters they were. They certainly cashed in on their college years I think.
• thedynasty1998

  

  ccrunner609;712162 wrote:I beg to differ....you have to remember this was the era that started the shoe deals and the jersey sales. just a few years before their time Michigan was making $1.5 million in sports royalties and after they were making $10.5 million during and after.

  friendfromlowry;712178 wrote:Exactly. Guys like Chris Webber go to "college" for two years and have to be dirt poor during it but then afterwards they go to the NBA and probably never have to worry about another dime. Meanwhile, most college students will graduate with a considerable amount of debt that will require years to pay off. So yeah, it's hard to sit here and feel sorry for them.

  
  The first quote is the answer to the second quote.
  
  Most students don't bring in $9 million for their respective Universities. I don't think players should be paid, but you can't say that the system is place is fair to the student athletes. The whole "They get their college paid for" argument is such a poor argument for guys like this.
• ytownfootball

  

  When there is as much money floating around as a result of these players contributions, there will be Fab5's, SMU's Cam Newton's and bogus tattoo shops...if we're not going to pay them a piece of the pie (I don't like the idea of paying them BTW) then we have to accept the consequences and investigations. There really is no other answer, too hard to run a tight ship of over a hundred players for anyone.
• thedynasty1998

  

  ytownfootball;712243 wrote:When there is as much money floating around as a result of these players contributions, there will be Fab5's, SMU's Cam Newton's and bogus tattoo shops...if we're not going to pay them a piece of the pie (I don't like the idea of paying them BTW) then we have to accept the consequences and investigations. There really is no other answer, too hard to run a tight ship of over a hundred players for anyone.

  
  Well said. I don't think there is any system where it would be "fair" to pay players. However, there are certain players that are absolutely exploited and make their respective Universities millions.
  
  We live in a greedy and selfish society, and especially in cases where you have kids who grow up with no money and it becomes accessible, it's just going to happen.
• ytownfootball

  

  thedynasty1998;712248 wrote:Well said. I don't think there is any system where it would be "fair" to pay players. However, there are certain players that are absolutely exploited and make their respective Universities millions.
  
  We live in a greedy and selfish society, and especially in cases where you have kids who grow up with no money and it becomes accessible, it's just going to happen.

  
  No, fair isn't ever going to happen in terms of paying student athletes. The money sinks of women's field hockey, synchronized swimming and their ilk won't let that shit happen, no matter the benefit "overall". I don't want that can of worms opened up anyway.
• friendfromlowry

  thedynasty1998;712241 wrote:Most students don't bring in $9 million for their respective Universities. I don't think players should be paid, but you can't say that the system is place is fair to the student athletes. The whole "They get their college paid for" argument is such a poor argument for guys like this.

  
  Poor argument how? It's not like Michigan made millions off of him and he didn't benefit from his time there. He played a couple seasons, showed people what he could really do, and was able to become the #1 pick in the draft. While he wasn't given his part of the pie at Michigan, he eventually did earn millions of dollars in the NBA.
  He also wasn't treated like "most students", either....hanging out with Muhammad Ali before games, taking 2-3 week trips to Europe, etc. They found ways of treating him better than the average student is.
• WebFire

  thedynasty1998;712241 wrote:The first quote is the answer to the second quote.
  
  Most students don't bring in $9 million for their respective Universities. I don't think players should be paid, but you can't say that the system is place is fair to the student athletes. The whole "They get their college paid for" argument is such a poor argument for guys like this.

  
  For guys like these? The ones that go on to make millions upon millions after they go to the NBA?
• WebFire

  friendfromlowry;712295 wrote:Poor argument how? It's not like Michigan made millions off of him and he didn't benefit from his time there. He played a couple seasons, showed people what he could really do, and was able to become the #1 pick in the draft. While he wasn't given his part of the pie at Michigan, he eventually did earn millions of dollars in the NBA.

  Exactly. The college level enables these athletes to move on the the pros, where they make millions. For the ones that don't go pro, they get a free education.
  
  How is that not fair?
• Prescott

  While he wasn't given his part of the pie at Michigan, he eventually did earn millions of dollars in the NBA.

  He deserved his piece of the pie from Michigan. What was the cost his two years at UM and what was the return? That is a helluva an investment return for whomever received the money.
• friendfromlowry

  Prescott;712313 wrote:He deserved his piece of the pie from Michigan.

  
  You can say that about a lot of college athletes. Luck deserves a piece of the pie from Stanford, Pryor & OSU, John Wall and Kentucky, Oden and OSU, etc. But that's not how college athletics work, and these guys damn well know that going in they can't legally earn a dime...but they sure as hell will if they play their cards right.
• WebFire

  Prescott;712313 wrote:He deserved his piece of the pie from Michigan. What was the cost his two years at UM and what was the return? That is a helluva an investment return for whomever received the money.

  
  They get "paid" with the exposure they get so that they can go on to make much more than the university made from them. I don't understand why people think college players should get paid. Why even have college athletics?
• KR1245

  

  friendfromlowry;712330 wrote:You can say that about a lot of college athletes. Luck deserves a piece of the pie from Stanford, Pryor & OSU, John Wall and Kentucky, Oden and OSU, etc. But that's now how college athletics work, and these guys damn well know that going in they can't legally earn a dime...but they sure as will if they play their cards right.

  
  Agreed
  
  It seemed like Jalen Rose, who helped produce the show had an agenda. "Its OK to take money, look how much money we made for the university". I might be wrong but thats what I took from it. I agree with Webfire, college kids should not get paid, thats the difference between the NBA and NCAA. If they wanted to make money they could have entered the draft.
• thedynasty1998

  

  WebFire;712298 wrote:Exactly. The college level enables these athletes to move on the the pros, where they make millions. For the ones that don't go pro, they get a free education.
  
  How is that not fair?

  WebFire;712332 wrote:They get "paid" with the exposure they get so that they can go on to make much more than the university made from them. I don't understand why people think college players should get paid. Why even have college athletics?

  Yes, they provide a platform for them to go to the pros, however, for that school that they do pick, they make them money.
  
  This is an argument that people will be on one side of the fence or the other. I personally don't think there is a system that would allow them to get paid, however I do think they are exploited.
  
  People still think the NCAA is about "amateur athletics" and the "student athletes". However, it's not. It's as money driven as Microsoft and Bank of America are. Everything they do is based upon maximizing revenue, whether it's start times, jersey sponsors, arena sponsors, corporate seat licenses, etc...
  
  The mission statement of the NCAA is the following:
  "To govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner"
• thedynasty1998

  

  KR1245;712344 wrote:Agreed
  
  It seemed like Jalen Rose, who helped produce the show had an agenda. "Its OK to take money, look how much money we made for the university". I might be wrong but thats what I took from it. I agree with Webfire, college kids should not get paid, thats the difference between the NBA and NCAA. If they wanted to make money they could have entered the draft.

  
  Yea, the Fab 5 could have. But kids today can't. They are being forced to go make money for a University. Still have no idea how that is legal.
• Prescott

  I don't understand why people think college players should get paid.

  Because they are being pimped by the NCAA and the schools.
• ytownfootball

  

  Prescott;712464 wrote:Because they are being pimped by the NCAA and the schools.

  
  They are, but what's your solution? We've been down this road many times and haven't ever come to a conclusion that is "fair" to everyone, it will never happen imo.
• WebFire

  Prescott;712464 wrote:Because they are being pimped by the NCAA and the schools.

  
  Think of it as an internship.
• WebFire

  thedynasty1998;712386 wrote:Yea, the Fab 5 could have. But kids today can't. They are being forced to go make money for a University. Still have no idea how that is legal.

  
  They aren't forced to. It's merely a prerequisite to a job. You want the job, you fulfill the prerequisites.
• Hb31187

  

  swamisez;711758 wrote:Of course growing up a Duke fan I disliked Michigan for the very reasons Michigan players disliked Duke. I felt Michigan was a bunch of thugged out ruffians who didn't belong in the college game.
  Thenctions kind of validated this point, but I am admittedly biased on this point. Thomas Hill, Grant Hill, Brian Davis were from good families and if memory serves were not public school educated.
  Coach K changed his stance a bit with the recruitment and signing of St.Louis native Chris Carrawell and Chicago kid Sean Dockery. Of course Duke got flack for signing Dockery because of his lower than normal test scores. But I guess it was so out of character it was a magnet for criticism.
  
  As for the Fab 5, great time in college hoops. Really exploded on the scene and made college basketball trendy and empowered players more so than coaches. I feel at that time coaches dominated the headlines (K, Dean, Carlisemo, Tark, Pitino) but with the fab 5 the players now became brand managers.

  
  Exactly why people hate Duke(well part of the reason). Because they look down their noses at everyone else like theyre high and mighty
• bigkahuna

  I just don't see how you could justify paying the football and men's basketball team but not pay women's basketball, hockey, or other sports. Or one school (OSU for example) has the revenue to pay their players, but a small school doesn't. Look at Steph Curry a few years ago with Davidson. Do you think Davidson would be able to compete with Duke, UNC... to pay someone?
  
  Paying players would do 1 of 2 things
  
  1. Eliminate non revenue sports
  2. Eliminate competition from most schools including the bottom of the power 6.
• Prescott

  They are, but what's your solution?

  Start by giving the players the proceeds from anything sold with their name on it.

  I felt Michigan was a bunch of thugged out ruffians

  What did you think about Dahntay Jones? He is considered a "dirty player" by many in the NBA and had the same rep in college.
  
  

  Of course Duke got flack for signing Dockery because of his lower than normal test scores. But I guess it was so out of character it was a magnet for criticism.

  Well known for academics - going into Sr year of High School Dockery had a 2.3 GPA and a 15 on his ACT. He eventually qualified.
• bigkahuna

  Prescott;712797 wrote:Start by giving the players the proceeds from anything sold with their name on it.
  .

  
  I guess our problem is solved then huh? Because, NOBODY has anything with their name on it.