• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NCAA to move 7 championships from North Carolina due to HB2 law

LOL, I'm sure you were a BIG fan if you're going to forego watching football over this issue.

I am actually. I watch NCAA football every Saturday. But I am also someone who is hugely annoyed with the leftist politicization of every avenue of life. Until they can get back to playing sports without trying to drive political agendas I will find something else to do with my Saturdays.

This is a "straw that broke the camels back" issue for me.
 
It really is so stupid.

We're talking about business owners being offended that there aren't laws that tell them how to run their business.

Why don't you just not run your business in the manner you dislike, as it's yours?

Why yearn for useless and paternalistic interference into free market decisions... As a business owner?

I think stupid didn't really cover this even, it doesn't have enough emphasis or intensity.
 
that is why most schools run in the red. You forget that those millions that football brings in fund all the
non-revenue sports like the tennis team and the soccer team and the softball team the baseball team
etc...

Plus the athletic directors and coaches... who are also... decently compensated.

yes 60+k a year is a decent compensation.

Not when you are responsible for $1 million + in revenue. How much money do you suspect Tim Tebow made UF? Furthermore, tuition for in-state schools averages about $9400/year.

Somebody is getting bent-over, and it sure isn't these schools.
 
Plus the athletic directors and coaches... who are also... decently compensated.



Not when you are responsible for $1 million + in revenue. How much money do you suspect Tim Tebow made UF? Furthermore, tuition for in-state schools averages about $9400/year.

Somebody is getting bent-over, and it sure isn't these schools.

They can do what they do today because regardless of the sport & sex, your compensation is a package made up of neutral costs: tuition, roam, board, etc.

A move into paying athletes will open up a can of worms the university & NCAA wants nothing to do with.
 
I think to put pressure on the NCAA, they should start a publicity campaign on paying players commensurate with coaches salaries.

The point is to get the NCAA to acknowledge that it is, after all, a business and so are it's members. It's time to put your money where you mouth is, and treat all college athletes properly without bringing sexual politics into it.
 
A move into paying athletes will open up a can of worms the university & NCAA wants nothing to do with.

Of course not! They are too interested in paying themselves....
 
Hoping such a thing is feasible is indeed grasping.
iLOL Hilariously wrong.
In this case it is a generalized expression in relation to the situation.
 
Most businesses I would not have a problem with this. The NCAA however, I think should stay way the **** away from anything the least bit political...

Agreed. Sets a dangerous precedent. If a state wants a law...they can have it. It is up to the federal government to decide if it is ok. Not a college athletic organization that profits on the talent of unpaid athletes.

What's next? Organized crime boycotting them? Maybe Enron? Fannie May?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
iLOL Hilariously wrong.
In this case it is a generalized expression in relation to the situation.

I notice you didn't explain who is to sue, and what they will sue for.

Grasper!
 
If the NCAA is so concerned about the discrimination laws they would remove the NC university teams from the NCAA. There is after all more regular season events than the 7 which are being removed. How come it is ok for the regular season, but not for the 7 championships? Doesn't anyone see how two sided this is?

Let the courts decide regarding the law. Let the games be played in NC.
 
I notice you didn't explain who is to sue, and what they will sue for.

Grasper!
Said the one grasping.
iLOL
As it was a generalized expression I do not need to explain anything other than it was a generalized of expression.
Or don't you understand what that means? As that was a rhetorical question, don't bother to answer. I am sure you understand which is why you are grasping for specifics when none were intended.
 
Plus the athletic directors and coaches... who are also... decently compensated.

why should they not be paid for a job? You are paid for your job yes?

Not when you are responsible for $1 million + in revenue. How much money do you suspect Tim Tebow made UF? Furthermore, tuition for in-state schools averages about $9400/year.

he also received free housing, free books, tutors when needed, free top notch gym access several personal trainers etc ...

all of that adds up big time not to mention all tax free.

Somebody is getting bent-over, and it sure isn't these schools.

Neither are the players.
 
As it was a generalized expression I do not need to explain anything other than it was a generalized of expression.

Expressing hope someone sues the NCAA is so very generalized... because it doesn't even make sense. Disagreeing would be one thing..., hoping they get sued is entirely something different.

I am sure you understand which is why you are grasping for specifics when none were intended.

Your generalized expression is devoid of any logic.
 
why should they not be paid for a job? You are paid for your job yes?

Nobody said they shouldn't be paid for a job.

he also received free housing, free books, tutors when needed, free top notch gym access several personal trainers etc ...

all of that adds up big time not to mention all tax free.

It pales in comparison to the revenue generated.

Neither are the players.

Only if one accepts exploitation as a way of doing business.
 
Agreed. Sets a dangerous precedent. If a state wants a law...they can have it. It is up to the federal government to decide if it is ok. Not a college athletic organization that profits on the talent of unpaid athletes.

What's next? Organized crime boycotting them? Maybe Enron? Fannie May?

That is not at all my reasoning. Businesses do not like a law and choose to take business elsewhere, great. No problem. The NCAA however is supposed to be representing schools and their athletes. so it is a little different to my mind.
 
I think you are confused. That is not the free market, it is an Association holding a member responsible for the actions of their state.

It is the free market, they can choose where to go, hell, they can kick a college out of the NCAA. NCAA is a non-profit organization.
 
1. The NCAA needs to stay out of politics.
2. I hope there is cause to sue as no University should be harmed for the actions of the State.

the NCAA's actions are appropriate
that organization is protecting its athletes-students-fans from discrimination within NC
kudos for showing such integrity
 
Nobody said they shouldn't be paid for a job.
You seem to be questioning it in your last post.

It pales in comparison to the revenue generated.

Umm most places pay people below what they make. it is how they keep
the program company. if compensation exceeds income for all people then well
you lose.


Only if one accepts exploitation as a way of doing business.
they are forced to play football? can you prove this?
they can sign up to be a normal student.

so they agree to play football and gain access to all the tax free benefits they have.
they aren't forced to play football so they are not exploited. it is something they choose to do.

I am pretty sure there are a lot of academic students would love to get all the benefits that college
players get without having to pay for it as well.
 
A state not allowing cities to violate private property rights isn't worth any kind of fuss; it should just be the norm.

you make an excellent point
NC motel owners and restaurants should be able to exclude black players, students, and fans from entering their premises
[pleasedonotneedthissarcasmindicator]
 
the NCAA's actions are appropriate
that organization is protecting its athletes-students-fans from discrimination within NC
kudos for showing such integrity

so you support thought policing no surprise here.
 
you make an excellent point
NC motel owners and restaurants should be able to exclude black players, students, and fans from entering their premises
[pleasedonotneedthissarcasmindicator]

Correct, they should be able to.

They should not do so, but they should be able to.

Liberty, try supporting it sometime.
 
I am actually. I watch NCAA football every Saturday. But I am also someone who is hugely annoyed with the leftist politicization of every avenue of life. Until they can get back to playing sports without trying to drive political agendas I will find something else to do with my Saturdays.

This is a "straw that broke the camels back" issue for me.

Your decision obviously, so will you also boycott NCAA corporate sponsors who, I'd bet my last dollar, are fully on board if not the big drivers of this move given the last thing they want are a bunch of social media boycotts of their products as a result of sponsoring games in NC? Same with ESPN and CBS who don't want a cloud hanging over the NCAA tournament broadcasts.

Bottom line is the NCAA is a huge business and pretty much every decision they make is based on the almighty do$$ar rather than the good of the game or student athletes, etc. and I see boycotting them over support for LGBT rights about like I'd view boycotting Goldman Sachs or JPM over their support for some liberal cause.
 
the NCAA's actions are appropriate
Your opinion is noted and dismissed as such.

that organization is protecting its athletes-students-fans from discrimination within NC
Hilarious.
Simply no. No one has shown any discrimination to begin with to even be complaining.





Expressing hope someone sues the NCAA is so very generalized... because it doesn't even make sense. Disagreeing would be one thing..., hoping they get sued is entirely something different.
No.
Someone? Hilarious.

Again.
As it was a generalized expression I do not need to explain anything other than it was a generalized of expression.


Your generalized expression is devoid of any logic.
Still grasping and still wrong.
As it was a generalized expression, it would be natural for folks to register it as disagreement. Don't worry though, as many here will understand why a "grasper" wouldn't understand that. Doh!





It is the free market, they can choose where to go, hell, they can kick a college out of the NCAA. NCAA is a non-profit organization.
Clearly you are not paying attention.
As you were told, it is an Association Member relationship. Not free market.
That relationship is what is called Freedom of Association and Assembly and "is derived from and dependent on the First Amendment guarantees of Freedom of Speech and expression".
 
Your decision obviously, so will you also boycott NCAA corporate sponsors who, I'd bet my last dollar, are fully on board if not the big drivers of this move given the last thing they want are a bunch of social media boycotts of their products as a result of sponsoring games in NC? Same with ESPN and CBS who don't want a cloud hanging over the NCAA tournament broadcasts.

Bottom line is the NCAA is a huge business and pretty much every decision they make is based on the almighty do$$ar rather than the good of the game or student athletes, etc. and I see boycotting them over support for LGBT rights about like I'd view boycotting Goldman Sachs or JPM over their support for some liberal cause.

Not watching the NCAA on TV would mean that I will not be supporting the advertisers. But then I don't drink alcohol or sports drinks and I am not in the market for a new car so it wouldn't be much of a boycott either way. I think I technically boycott their advertisers already.
 
Back
Top Bottom