NCAA is socialist, etc...

jvquarterback wrote:

In less than one week and in just 12 posts, jvqb has done what many before him (i.e. airwolf, baseball america) took weeks if not months to do: prove that they are more about being contrarian than in contributing to any meaningful conversation. I don't think jvqb is for real-at least, for his sake and for that of all who now or will later depend on him I hope he's not for real. I must conclude he is a troll. If this isn't a trolling attempt, then I believe a measure of socialism will be helpful to him later in life. The invisible hand isn't very friendly to his type.

I have and will continue to benefit from charity, but never from socialism. No one ever does.

Nobody benefits from charity - as in handouts. Do you know what socialism is?

jvquarterback wrote:

A few questions.

1. At what age do you start paying for play?

2. Give me three good reasons why you don't pay for earlier play than what you answered in #1?

3. Are there any limits on what you pay players? Do richer schools get all the best athletes from here on out?



As much fun as college football changing to only include USC, Texas, Florida and Notre Dame I wouldn't watch any of it.

1. Whenever someone is willing to pay the athlete and the athlete is willing to perform for the compensation.

2. No one is willing to pay them to play prior to that.

3. No. The athlete goes where they perceive they derive the greatest benefit in return for their production.



I think you would be surprised at how things worked out in terms of product on the field.

So the kid in 8th grade that has a scholarship to Florida, he gets what? Six figures? I can't see anything wrong with that. It would destroy football, and more importantly our nation. It isn't like we already have a bunch of half-wits running around, let's give them $20,000 when they're in 4th grade and have them quit school.



The same de-evolution that the NBA has: Thug mentality, no passing, no actual fundamentals. Who can dunk and throw alley oops. The NBA is disgusting, and your plan would do the same thing to the NFL and more importantly - college football.



Does anyone know if Steed ever talked about being a JV quarterback?

jvquarterback wrote:

jvquarterback wrote:
I can see how some may interpret what I've said as the football players are forced to play.

jvquarterback wrote:
Well what would you call it when one group of people is forced to do something

Personally, I'm not sure anyone could interpret it any other way.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here from failing to think outside the box but boosters are being forced not to provide benefits to athletes.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! :D :lol: :P



I've seen a lot of people try and pull their foot out of their mouth, but this one takes the cake. Your full statement was "Well what would you call it when one group of people is forced to do something that has great value and the proceeds are handed out to many others who do not produce the same value while the administrators of the system get filthy rich?"



And then you come back a few pages later and try to spin just the first sixteen words of that into a "I was talking about boosters, not players" and pretend the rest of the run-on sentence was never there.



I also think you need to learn the difference between socialism, communism, indentured servitude, and slavery--you keep calling your amorphous evil "socialism," but you really keep talking about the other three, with no real grasp of what socialism is.

1) it's nice to see a real debate, people were getting a bit too snippy around here.

2) the black helicopter picture was the funniest thing I'd seen all day. Priceless

3) I would love to see Auburn get the axe, and then start pointing fingers at the entire SEC and have the whole conference's superiority complex collapse around them.

4) I believe that college football is ruthlessly exploited by colleges and that it funnels millions and millions of dollars to administrators as a cash cow but that generally that money goes to improve the education and experience for millions of others. And that players sign up voluntarily because of the shot at either temporary or longer term glory and a chance to be in the spotlight. Luke Ashworth may just have played his entire career to have a the four catches he did last week and be "THE MAN" for a day.

jvquarterback wrote:

What I find hard to believe is that there are so many un-ethical football families willing to take money, knowing it's against the law and not one questioning where that money is coming from.



Is society that corrupt already?

First, taking money to play football is not against the law. I personally would respect Cam Newton and the rest of the players for Auburn, Auburn University and, if this really is pervasive throughout the SEC, then everyone involved for paying these young men at least of part of the value they provide.



The problem is not people who want to pay or players that want to be paid. The problem is the bunch of communists in the NCAA, a quasi-government institution trying to benefit themselves at the expense of poor young African-American men. I would wager 90% of posters here would say they are in favor of a free market, yet when it comes to college athletics their morals fly out the window and they are ready to side with a bunch of academics and coaches from the Big10 and PAC10 who are undoubtedly socialists and communists.



Please explain your hypocritical positions.

I can understand why you might call CFB a socialist organization and I can even understand some of your earlier arguments, but this statement I don't get. You're right, taking money to play football is not against the law, but it is against the rules and I should have said it that way. By agreeing to play in the NCAA, you agreed to follow the rules. If you break those rules especially for your own personal gain, you are unethical and a cheat.



Just out of curiosity, do you think that anything not written in law is therefore acceptable? If you believe that college athletics is a corrupt organization that pilfers on "young african-american" men, does that justify breaking the rules they agreed to follow? that's the case-perfect definition of unethical behavior and you're condoning it with full heart and mind. let's just follow the law? are you serious? Let's talk to some of the many lawyers on this board about what good that would do society. Did you know that Missouri's extermination order against the mormons wasn't repealed until 1976? Yay! let's go legally shoot some Mormons!



I don't care if the system is run by Al Capone and Bernie Madoff, you agreed to the rules by playing. That's on YOU. If you disagree with the rules and still want to play, work with and change the system. This is not about protesting the 'market value' of an amateur athlete but an incredibly selfish way to get yourself secretly paid and directly threaten the athletics of thousands of athletes who are following the rules and have no idea their athletic department is about to be destroyed. That's on you too.



Finally you extol the virtues of a "Free market" when history has clearly shown that a truly unregulated market leads to wild swings in value, monopolies, insider-trading, pay to play behavior (sound familiar?) , and profit-destructive behavior. Thank you SEC, Sherman Anti-trust act, stock-market circuit breakers, the US Central bank and yes, thank you NCAA for regulating unethical cheats.

snoscythe wrote:

I also think you need to learn the difference between socialism, communism, indentured servitude, and slavery--you keep calling your amorphous evil "socialism," but you really keep talking about the other three, with no real grasp of what socialism is.

Socialiism - A theory or policy of social organisation which aims at or advocates the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc., by the community as a whole, and their administration or distribution in the interests of all people. Oxford English Dictionary

I think I have been outspoken about all of the aspects of college football that are corrupt. The socialist ideology that the production of the football players should be given to wrestlers or tennis players is but a part. I think I have been fair in pointing out the elements of crony capitalism as well. If you don't think so then here you go:



The real problem is that universities are granted an essential monopoly by government in producing football as entertainment for athletes from age 17-21 (or 26 if you are an RM). Some others have asked why don't you set up a competing league with athletes who would prefer to be paid for their services. The answer is there is no way to compete with an organization that is owned by the state and is granted a monopoly by the state.



1. The state owns the means of production. About 86% (102/119) FBS teams are owned by the state or federal governments. Shared ownership of the means of production = socialism.

2. Even the private schools receive subsidies from government in multiple forms (grants and loans as well as the tax-free status of donations to name just a few). Government granted competitive advantage (ie monoploy) = crony capitalism.

byutx wrote:

Tell me this, jvqb, you do understand what "amateur" means, right?

Yes. I have stated previously amateurism is the justification most here give for their socialist ideology relative young men playing football for the universities that comprise the NCAA.

byutx wrote:
Also, here are some more questions for you. Are you an anarchist or do you understand the need for rules?

I believe in one rule when it comes to the use of force: do not use it unless someone is using it against you.

byutx wrote:
Do you think that the market should dictate how the refs make certain calls or is it too socialist to insist that the rules in a game be applied the same across the board? Should the richest teams get all the calls by legally paying the refs? Do you like professional wrestling?

Yes. If people would continue to pay to watch such an absurdity they should be allowed to. I think the market would regulate this just fine.

byutx wrote:
I don't get into politics very often, but the uber-conservative extremists are in for a rude awakening when they realize they're going to end up in the same hell to which they're certain that the liberals are headed.

It is evidence of the sad state of the the world (and our educational system) when liberty is called conservatism. What liberty is there left to conserve when the state owns the schools?

CougarClaw wrote:



I can understand why you might call CFB a socialist organization and I can even understand some of your earlier arguments, but this statement I don't get. You're right, taking money to play football is not against the law, but it is against the rules and I should have said it that way. By agreeing to play in the NCAA, you agreed to follow the rules. If you break those rules especially for your own personal gain, you are unethical and a cheat.



Just out of curiosity, do you think that anything not written in law is therefore acceptable?

The laws of men bear minimal correlation to that which is moral. A law passed by a government does not make a thing moral or immoral.

CougarClaw wrote:
If you believe that college athletics is a corrupt organization that pilfers on "young african-american" men, does that justify breaking the rules they agreed to follow? that's the case-perfect definition of unethical behavior and you're condoning it with full heart and mind. let's just follow the law? are you serious?

Yes. If someone steals from you, it is usually in your best interest (as well as in the best interest of society) to take back what has been stolen. In this case the NCAA steals your opportunity to obtain payment for providing a service by destroying the competition.

CougarClaw wrote:
I don't care if the system is run by Al Capone and Bernie Madoff, you agreed to the rules by playing. That's on YOU. If you disagree with the rules and still want to play, work with and change the system. This is not about protesting the 'market value' of an amateur athlete but an incredibly selfish way to get yourself secretly paid and directly threaten the athletics of thousands of athletes who are following the rules and have no idea their athletic department is about to be destroyed. That's on you too.

Sure. I don't care who runs the system either, but when they begin to use force to destroy their competitors who would be willing to pay you, you are entitled to use force to prevent this. The fact that others benefit from the force used against you simply makes them more culpable.

CougarClaw wrote:
Finally you extol the virtues of a "Free market" when history has clearly shown that a truly unregulated market leads to wild swings in value, monopolies, insider-trading, pay to play behavior (sound familiar?) , and profit-destructive behavior. Thank you SEC, Sherman Anti-trust act, stock-market circuit breakers, the US Central bank and yes, thank you NCAA for regulating unethical cheats.

I'm glad you are able to outline the myths taught to you by your government provided, government educated high school economics teacher. Thanks for the enlightenment.

jvquarterback wrote:

I also think you need to learn the difference between socialism, communism, indentured servitude, and slavery--you keep calling your amorphous evil "socialism," but you really keep talking about the other three, with no real grasp of what socialism is.

Socialiism - A theory or policy of social organisation which aims at or advocates the ownership and control of the means of production, capital, land, property, etc., by the community as a whole, and their administration or distribution in the interests of all people. Oxford English Dictionary

I think I have been outspoken about all of the aspects of college football that are corrupt. The socialist ideology that the production of the football players should be given to wrestlers or tennis players is but a part. I think I have been fair in pointing out the elements of crony capitalism as well. If you don't think so then here you go:



The real problem is that universities are granted an essential monopoly by government in producing football as entertainment for athletes from age 17-21. Some others have asked why don't you set up a competing league with athletes who would prefer to be paid for their services. The answer is there is no way to compete with an organization that is owned by the state or is granted a monopoly by the state.



1. The state owns the means of production. About 86% (102/119) FBS teams are owned by the state or federal governments. Shared ownership of the means of production = socialism.

2. Even the private schools receive subsidies from government in multiple forms (grants and loans as well as the tax-free status of donations to name just a few). Government granted competitive advantage (ie monoploy) = crony capitalism.

This is a ridiculous assumption. People absolutely could create a "YNFL" - a youth football league. The reason there isn't one, is because there is no need. Most players wouldn't make it into such a program. They play football for the free education, babes, and whatever long or short term glory/happiness they find in it. For more than 90 percent, it is something to do during college, and in a lot of cases it pays for all or most of their schooling. Most these kids have no pro aspirations.



There are super competitve -even semi-pro- s on a national level for every sport besides football. So if there was a demand for it, there would be a supply. There isn't. Most kids want to go to school for free, those that want more, intend to break the rules and find someone to break the rules with them. They aren't concerned with making things fair: if they were talented kids would go on "strike" not letting colleges have their talents. But that doesn't happen. The players that take money aren't looking to change the system; they are taking money when they shouldn't be. If they want to get paid to play, join arena football for a couple years til you are of age, or form a league.



Your grounds for argument are shaky at best, but here you are stupidly wrong.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

BlueIsBetter wrote:
This is a ridiculous assumption. People absolutely could create a "YNFL" - a youth football league. The reason there isn't one, is because there is no need. Most players wouldn't make it into such a program. They play football for the free education, babes, and whatever long or short term glory/happiness they find in it. For more than 90 percent, it is something to do during college, and in a lot of cases it pays for all or most of their schooling. Most these kids have no pro aspirations.



There are super competitve -even semi-pro- s on a national level for every sport besides football. So if there was a demand for it, there would be a supply. There isn't. Most kids want to go to school for free, those that want more, intend to break the rules and find someone to break the rules with them. They aren't concerned with making things fair: if they were talented kids would go on "strike" not letting colleges have their talents. But that doesn't happen. The players that take money aren't looking to change the system; they are taking money when they shouldn't be. If they want to get paid to play, join arena football for a couple years til you are of age, or form a league.

So are you saying the NCAA and universities do not enjoy a government granted advantage relative arena league football or YNFL? These advantages are violence done to the potential employers of the young men playing football. I think that gives the young men the moral standing to "break a rule" that is part of the violence done



By the way, I love the quote and think it applies very well to this situation. I think Thomas Paine would be appalled at the the idea of the monopoly/cartel of the NCAA. Can't remember where he stood on the formation (and forced government funding) of the University of Virginia, but if he was consistent as he usually was, he would have frowned on that as well.

This thread has drifted too far from the original topic of Auburn's pay-to-play scandal and either needs to be reigned in (talking about Auburn, the SEC, or Cam Newton) or get separated into it's own thread in the Lounge, where you all can continue to pontificate on socialism, communism, or whatever.



Seriously, this is getting lame.

jvqb needs to read the 12th article of faith and this thread needs to be locked, moved to the "lounge" or heavily edited.

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
This thread has drifted too far from the original topic of Auburn's pay-to-play scandal and either needs to be reigned in (talking about Auburn, the SEC, or Cam Newton) or get separated into it's own thread in the Lounge, where you all can continue to pontificate on socialism, communism, or whatever.



Seriously, this is getting lame.

Don't like my defense of Cam Newton and Auburn? Neither does anyone else. I think Mr Newton is a great guy, who has done no violence to anyone, and is exercising his right to pursue happiness. His acceptance of money, if true, is an admirable and moral position. The folks at Auburn should be proud, they are being true to the ideal of freedom this country once stood for.



There you go. back on topic.

jvquarterback wrote:

This is a ridiculous assumption. People absolutely could create a "YNFL" - a youth football league. The reason there isn't one, is because there is no need. Most players wouldn't make it into such a program. They play football for the free education, babes, and whatever long or short term glory/happiness they find in it. For more than 90 percent, it is something to do during college, and in a lot of cases it pays for all or most of their schooling. Most these kids have no pro aspirations.



There are super competitve -even semi-pro- s on a national level for every sport besides football. So if there was a demand for it, there would be a supply. There isn't. Most kids want to go to school for free, those that want more, intend to break the rules and find someone to break the rules with them. They aren't concerned with making things fair: if they were talented kids would go on "strike" not letting colleges have their talents. But that doesn't happen. The players that take money aren't looking to change the system; they are taking money when they shouldn't be. If they want to get paid to play, join arena football for a couple years til you are of age, or form a league.

So are you saying the NCAA and universities do not enjoy a government granted advantage relative arena league football?



By the way, I love the quote and think it applies very well to this situation.

Thanks. and I agree with your principles for the most part, just not the application.



Do you think that college football could compete with Todays NFL in revenue generating? Or college basketball to the NBa? College baseball to the MLB?



No. They can't. Just as talented kids would rather play in a farm team than college baseball, talented kids would rather play football in a semi-pro league getting paid. That however is not the NCAA. The NCAA is for STUDENTS. Kids that want to play sports while they go to school. Brandon Jennings found a way to get paid, and still comply with the NbA's restrictions.



You can't blame the non-existence of a non-league on a league that exists, and fulfills its purpose. And as far as the gov't is concerned, it has no money so do you think it really could compete with one of the largest operations in the world (The NFL)?



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

byutx wrote:
jvqb needs to read the 12th article of faith and this thread needs to be locked, moved to the "lounge" or heavily edited.

Read it. Interesting that we also believe things that start "When in the course of human events . . ." are also inspired. It almost seems like you have to think about what the government does to decide if they are moral or not. And the 12th article of faith certainly does not condemn Cam Newton or any others who stand up for what is correct even though the government says otherwise.

jvquarterback wrote:



If someone steals from you, it is usually in your best interest (as well as in the best interest of society) to take back what has been stolen. In this case the NCAA steals your opportunity to obtain payment for providing a service by destroying the competition.

Anarchy: a state of disorder due to the nonrecognition of authority. I prefer order and government thank you. We'll just disagree whether or not laws and rules that participants agree to should be followed or not.

jvquarterback wrote:

Finally you extol the virtues of a "Free market" when history has clearly shown that a truly unregulated market leads to wild swings in value, monopolies, insider-trading, pay to play behavior (sound familiar?) , and profit-destructive behavior. Thank you SEC, Sherman Anti-trust act, stock-market circuit breakers, the US Central bank and yes, thank you NCAA for regulating unethical cheats.

I'm glad you are able to outline the myths taught to you by your government provided, government educated high school economics teacher. Thanks for the enlightenment.

nice assumptions:

1) The US government is hell-bent on perpetuating economic theory and myths that fit and defend their own actions (hard to say, but probably 75% false)

2) Ideas that I presented could only come from a US government-run high school (false)

3) I'm incapable of free thought (like yourself) and therefore must learned this from attending such a high school and am simply reiterating my simplistic HS education (false, false, and false)



You're certainly entitled to think the professional economists I learned this from (not in a US-run HS btw :lol:) are off their rocker. But you may want to check your window. You never know what you might see outside:



http://webzoom.freewebs.com/cafcorsair/Images/Airwolf/Airwolf%20Van%20Nuys%20Airshow%201986_Steve%20Hirst_640.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

This topic, along with showing the negative of extremism on any end (moderation in all things) has gotten extremely out of hand, so I'm splitting off this weird part of it and moving it to the lounge.



But it has also inspired me, maybe I need to exercise my liberty and require payment for certain users to post here, rather than being forced to display their posts with no monetary rewards.

hawkwing wrote:
This topic, along with showing the negative of extremism on any end (moderation in all things) has gotten extremely out of hand, so I'm splitting off this weird part of it and moving it to the lounge.



But it has also inspired me, maybe I need to exercise my liberty and require payment for certain users to post here, rather than being forced to display their posts with no monetary rewards.

haha, and that would be your right to do so.



And I would appreciate it if you would stop "forcing" me to come here daily - by providing something of value that I enjoy and charging me nothing for it. How dare you?

BlueIsBetter wrote:

This topic, along with showing the negative of extremism on any end (moderation in all things) has gotten extremely out of hand, so I'm splitting off this weird part of it and moving it to the lounge.



But it has also inspired me, maybe I need to exercise my liberty and require payment for certain users to post here, rather than being forced to display their posts with no monetary rewards.

haha, and that would be your right to do so.



And I would appreciate it if you would stop "forcing" me to come here daily - by providing something of value that I enjoy and charging me nothing for it. How dare you?

Not to mention what he does with the oodles of profits. Have you SEEN his car?!?

After having read all of this I can see why JV Quarterback is still "JV"...come back when you've made varsity....



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">