are you secretly hoping clarett fails?

Killian · Post by **Killian** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 7:38 pm

I'm asking your opinion. Do you think it would have bennefited him by staying in school for one or two more years? Because even in his workouts, he was a back with average speed and durability issues.

If you take this year into consideration, is Peterson ready to go pro? Probably. Is Michael Har? I doubt it. There used to be no limit for kids to go pro. When Jon Vaughn and Tommy Maddox declared after their Soph. years, no one thought anything of it. They were out of the league in 2 or 3 years. Maddox came back because he took the time to mature.

I will agree with you that there are ocassionally a player or two who is ready for the NFL after his Freshman year. But I could probably count on 1 hand the number that were ready in the last 15-20 years.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:08 pm

Killian wrote:I'm asking your opinion. Do you think it would have bennefited him by staying in school for one or two more years? Because even in his workouts, he was a back with average speed and durability issues.

Given what has happened with Clarett and the NCAA, not a chance. He mentaly left the college game the second the Miami-Ohio State game ended. Some might say he mentaly left reality, but that remains to be seen. If Clarett was smart, he's taken advantage of the past 12 months to study everything he can about the NFL game and work himself into a more durable version of himself. Is he that smart? I doubt it.

If you take this year into consideration, is Peterson ready to go pro? Probably. Is Michael Har? I doubt it. There used to be no limit for kids to go pro. When Jon Vaughn and Tommy Maddox declared after their Soph. years, no one thought anything of it. They were out of the league in 2 or 3 years. Maddox came back because he took the time to mature.

I will agree with you that there are ocassionally a player or two who is ready for the NFL after his Freshman year. But I could probably count on 1 hand the number that were ready in the last 15-20 years.

I agree. There are not too many 18 year olds ready for life in the NFL. Furthermore, the NFL is very unforgiving towards "project" players ever since the cap. Even if the age limit is overturned, I wouldn't expect to see more than 1 or 2 players attempt to make the jump in any given year. If the NCAA allows players without agents to keep their eligibility up to the draft, players could get a pretty good idea as to their real NFL worth.

War Stoops · Post by **War Stoops** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:13 pm

BSmack wrote:Because you and I know damn well that a team would have drafted Clarett had he been allowed IN the draft.

No, I'm asking why you think his rights are more important than the NFL's not the individual teams'. The teams have the power to change the rule if enough owners want it changed. But I strongly believe that the NFL should have the right to set it's rules as it wants (obviously within reason, which is ensured by the players union.)

Killian · Post by **Killian** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:19 pm

BSmack wrote: I agree. There are not too many 18 year olds ready for life in the NFL. Furthermore, the NFL is very unforgiving towards "project" players ever since the cap. Even if the age limit is overturned, I wouldn't expect to see more than 1 or 2 players attempt to make the jump in any given year. If the NCAA allows players without agents to keep their eligibility up to the draft, players could get a pretty good idea as to their real NFL worth.

I completely agree with this. My main concern is that I don't want to see the NFL/College football turn into the NBA/College basketball. Yes there are LeBron's, but there are far to many Kwame Brown's, Korleone Young's, etc. I don't want to see teams starting to draft HS studs because they may develop in 5 years.

My fear is that it would be many more than 1 or 2 each year. Maybe you would get a kid like Darius Walker, but without a solid background. Did he have a good year? Yeah. Is he ready for the league? No fucking way. I don't want to see kids in this situation piss away their chance later because of the temptation now.

If you had a system like the NBA, where you could declare and then comeback, I would be more for it. But I still think it's a bad idea.

Mr T · Post by **Mr T** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:52 pm

The better question would be who is not hoping he fails?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:25 pm

Killian wrote:I completely agree with this. My main concern is that I don't want to see the NFL/College football turn into the NBA/College basketball. Yes there are LeBron's, but there are far to many Kwame Brown's, Korleone Young's, etc. I don't want to see teams starting to draft HS studs because they may develop in 5 years.

My fear is that it would be many more than 1 or 2 each year. Maybe you would get a kid like Darius Walker, but without a solid background. Did he have a good year? Yeah. Is he ready for the league? No fucking way. I don't want to see kids in this situation piss away their chance later because of the temptation now.

If you had a system like the NBA, where you could declare and then comeback, I would be more for it. But I still think it's a bad idea.

You won't see an NBA situation happening in the NFL unless the current cap system changes dramatically. There is no room on an NFL roster to hide a project player anymore. Besides, drafting a project player means you get to pay his salary for 4 years, then watch him move to greener pastures. With the exception of idiots like Dan Snyder and Al Davis, I doubt you'll see owners lining up to throw money away at freshmen players.

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:30 pm

BSmack wrote:Besides, drafting a project player means you get to pay his salary for 4 years, then watch him move to greener pastures.

I totally forgot that project players in the NBA don't get paid until they crack the starting lineup... :roll:

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Thu Jan 27, 2005 9:36 pm

IndyFrisco wrote:
BSmack wrote:Besides, drafting a project player means you get to pay his salary for 4 years, then watch him move to greener pastures.
I totally forgot that project players in the NBA don't get paid until they crack the starting lineup... :roll:

What the fuck is that supposed to mean? Speak English.

The Anomaly · Post by **The Anomaly** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:12 am

Game, set, match.

Stay down B.....stay down.

Left Seater · Post by **Left Seater** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 3:19 am

Damn 88 huge RACKS!

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 3:59 am

88 wrote:2004

Well, at least you're in the right century. Maybe now we can play on a level field. And that article does raise a number of questions. The first question it raises is the logical question of where the money comes from to pay big time "student athletes" to begin with. Right now that money comes from boosters and is funneled through whatever channels are available to the athletes. In a system where payments to athletes were legal, boosters could give money to the athletic department that could LEGALY be given to the players. Ergo, the amount of money available to pay athletes would be much greater than the article implies.

Secondly, the article presumes that the number of football scholarships would remain unchanged. Like I have posted earlier, there is no reason to have 85 scholarship players on a football team. Lowering that number to 60 would net considerable cost savings and increase the competitive balance.

Third, the article does not address the potential financial windfall of a true National Championship Tournament for football. Such an event would be a multi billion dollar cash infusion. Of course, that would require the NCAA to be honest and forward thinking. Which is about as likely as Bush admitting he was wrong about Iraq.

Simply put, there is enough money out there.

88 wrote:"Title IX

What about it? Equal pay for equal work. A college's mission is to prepare students for life.

BSmack wrote:You are obviously confused. The purpose of a college or university is to educate its students. Athletic programs, while sponsored and operated by the college or university, are ancillary to that primary mission. No college exists to operate a football team that packs 100,000 asses in the seats. Colleges may have athletic programs that do, in fact, operate a football team that packs 100,000 asses in the seats, but that is not the primary mission of the college. If colleges and universities start employing athletes to play sports for them, aren't they completely missing the object of their existence, which is to educate students?

That's what they are doing NOW. Read the thread on Albert Means. It's fuckin hilarious watching you guys slapfight with each other over whose college/conference is dirtier than the other. I just think it would be better if the colleges were HONEST about it.

Requiring college students to be college students doesn't affect anyone's right to pursue a career at all. Once they've finished college, they can pursue any career they choose. Or, if they don't want to be students, they can skip college and pursue a career without getting an education. As much as I would like to see the NFL's 3-year waiting period invalidated, I can see why it is in place. An 18 year old is not mature enough to make a decision regarding his or her career. Hell, isn't that the justification for refusing to serve them liquor and beer? A lack of maturity. In the NFL's opinion, physical maturity is also an issue. I disagree with the NFL, but its their game and their rules, so far.

Funny, the US Army thinks an 18 year old is perfectly capable of making a mature decision. We've got thousands of them over in Iraq. When the Army stops taking 18 year olds, then I'll change my tune on that.

88 wrote:Actually, I do a lot of work for free. Its called pro bono, and its for the good of the community in general. You should try it sometime.

But you get paid first. I'm pretty certain you don't report 0.00 income on your taxes.

But you are mixing apples and oranges. No one is asking anyone to work for free. Clarett was given a tremendous package of benefits to attend OSU and play football. He got free tuition, books, room and board, tutors, athletic equipment and health care, and many, many other perks I didn't get during my years there. He wanted more. Fine. He can have more. Just not until this upcoming draft.

And obviously he wanted something else. As an American, he should have had that right to chose. It is patently obvious that the NFL conspired with its players union to create an artificial restraint of trade.

88 wrote:ONE? Are you serious? What is wrong with requiring that all students be students first, and athletes if they have the time and ability? Are you for real?

I am very real. I have no problem with your student first, athlete second idea. I just realize that it is pretty damn unlikely that your average player participating in 20 hours a week of organized practice, a semesters worth of bi-weekly travel, weight training, playbook study and film study is going to be 100% keyed into his studies. Not having spring practice would at least give the players that much more time to focus on their studies.

Of course, we both know that will never happen.

All I really want to see for college football is a day when a case like the Albert Means case is a historical footnote, not a commonplace occurrence. IMO, letting guys like Clarett out of the college system and being more above board about paying athletes would be two solid starts in that direction. And then I could go back to watching the Orange play mediocre football and occasionally upsetting a top 10 team every 10 years or so.

Renaissance Man · Post by **Renaissance Man** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:31 am

BSmack:

Here is your new avatard. You've earned it.

peter dragon · Post by **peter dragon** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 10:25 am

BSmack wrote:
88 wrote:Actually, I do a lot of work for free. Its called pro bono, and its for the good of the community in general. You should try it sometime.
But you get paid first. I'm pretty certain you don't report 0.00 income on your taxes.

FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOW FOR A FACT YOU ARE DEAD FUCKING WRONG BSmack
RACK 88

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:58 pm

[quote="88"][/quote]

Smack out of ideas?

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:00 pm

peter dragon wrote:
BSmack wrote:
88 wrote:Actually, I do a lot of work for free. Its called pro bono, and its for the good of the community in general. You should try it sometime.
But you get paid first. I'm pretty certain you don't report 0.00 income on your taxes.
FROM SOMEONE WHO KNOW FOR A FACT YOU ARE DEAD FUCKING WRONG BSmack
RACK 88

Then do explain. Cause I'm pretty sure that 88 doesn't roll around C-Bus in sackcloth. But if I'm wrong, and he is Mother Teresa II, I'll give it up.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:05 pm

Renaissance Man wrote:BSmack:

Here is your new avatard. You've earned it.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where you had a take?

indyfrisco · Post by **indyfrisco** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 1:54 pm

BSmack wrote:
88 wrote:
Smack out of ideas?

He's said what needs to be said. Go ahead and take the last word before I move this tot the archives. For some, last word is all that matters.

This debate is over. Good debate on both sides, though. Truth vs. Persistence.

PSUFAN · Post by **PSUFAN** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:04 pm

welcome to the CFB forum, Bsmack.

Killian · Post by **Killian** » Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:06 pm

Last word.

Do I win?

Frisco: Yep...on the the archives.