šŸ“” Cam Robinson and Hootie Jones arrested

No this young lady is a true Bama fan and my granddaughter. She should have been walking across the field this Friday night getting her diploma. With the kids she has been in school with since kindergarten. But she got her G.E.D now, it not stopping her going to UAB to become a doctor. Sorry if what I wrote didn't make any scene sometime my writing is not the best. :D

Cool man! I wasn't sure if it was someone you knew or what. Congratulations to her and you, sir!
 



Most of this is true... You're missing the bigger picture though, especially when you say "hazard of the job"... Risking their health is basically unnecessary at that point. No one is going to argue that $40,000 in education, sweat pants, and meal plans is worth losing out on 5 million over their first rookie contract cause they can't pass their doctors physical (see Jon Allen).

I'm glad it worked our for Lattimore, and I'm sure it has for others, but for every positive story about coming back from injury there are washed up and washed out dudes that never got to fully collect on their potential talent due to injury.

For the top 10 or so juniors, it comes down to minimizing risk instead of "proving" themselves. I'm looking forward to seeing who sets that trend first by sitting out, cause I think it will push the NFL and NCAA into changing the rule and allowing these young men to get paid if/when they deserve to get paid, instead of holding them hostage for the gain of college football coaches/administrators/football fans.

I personally think this new age thinking will ruin college athletics. They're being compensated, now whether or not it's to a scale that people like is a different story. We all could have a poker in that fire with how much our companies make off our backs compared to the compensation.

The point I take issue with is you saying that they could be forfeiting money instead of sitting out and being assured of that money. Isn't that setting up a precedent that will undoubtedly make the failure rate increase when these guys get a false sense of direction or an incorrect evaluation?

In the end, it doesn't matter what the NCAA, Universities, TV stations make off the back of these guys. They are applying for the opportunity to make millions. They are given the rare chance to jump straight to millionaires, so them following NCAA rules and playing three years is a small price to pay. All in all, it's like an internship, long hours, underpaid, and just fighting for the chance at a full time position. So if these guys sit out a year in efforts of staying injury free, would they need to pay back money to the NFL team's when they get injured since they can't perform their duties and hold up to their obligations? It's a slippery slope. I don't think you and I will agree on this issue, and that's fine, but I think it's all getting out of hand now with everyone holding their hand out wanting more, while it always ends up as us, the fans, being the ones that get stuck with the tab.
 
I personally think this new age thinking will ruin college athletics. They're being compensated, now whether or not it's to a scale that people like is a different story. We all could have a poker in that fire with how much our companies make off our backs compared to the compensation.

The point I take issue with is you saying that they could be forfeiting money instead of sitting out and being assured of that money. Isn't that setting up a precedent that will undoubtedly make the failure rate increase when these guys get a false sense of direction or an incorrect evaluation?

In the end, it doesn't matter what the NCAA, Universities, TV stations make off the back of these guys. They are applying for the opportunity to make millions. They are given the rare chance to jump straight to millionaires, so them following NCAA rules and playing three years is a small price to pay. All in all, it's like an internship, long hours, underpaid, and just fighting for the chance at a full time position. So if these guys sit out a year in efforts of staying injury free, would they need to pay back money to the NFL team's when they get injured since they can't perform their duties and hold up to their obligations? It's a slippery slope. I don't think you and I will agree on this issue, and that'S fine, but I think kids it's all getting out of hand now with everyone holding their hand out wanting more, while it always ends up as us, the fans, being the ones that get stuck with the tab.

I agree with you on mostly everything you say... but our biggest disagreement seems to be how we view the NCAA. I believe it's a completely flawed system and is borderline criminal in terms of how they make their money. Which leads us to a disagreement on the best way for the stud athletes to use the NCAA to get what they are capable of getting.

I just believe that college football is such a great game and the kids are so talented that despite the NCAA issues, it still thrives and people will love it. However, the mandatory 3 year system makes little to no sense, along with many other precedence the NCAA sets on a year to year basis. Big changes will happen or eventually it will fall apart - Whether that's 5 years or 50 years, serious changes will need to be made. The player stipend was a smart move but just a band aid. Really all it would take is the CF players to unite and sit out 1 Saturday... Shit will hit the fan when the money stops rolling in from TV ads, ticket sales, parking rape, concessions, and on and on...
 
I agree with you on mostly everything you say... but our biggest disagreement seems to be how we view the NCAA. I believe it's a completely flawed system and is borderline criminal in terms of how they make their money. Which leads us to a disagreement on the best way for the stud athletes to use the NCAA to get what they are capable of getting.

I just believe that college football is such a great game and the kids are so talented that despite the NCAA issues, it still thrives and people will love it. However, the mandatory 3 year system makes little to no sense, along with many other precedence the NCAA sets on a year to year basis. Big changes will happen or eventually it will fall apart - Whether that's 5 years or 50 years, serious changes will need to be made. The player stipend was a smart move but just a band aid. Really all it would take is the CF players to unite and sit out 1 Saturday... **** will hit the fan when the money stops rolling in from TV ads, ticket sales, parking rape, concessions, and on and on...

Would you agree to making them play four years and working towards earning a degree, or is it strictly about the money from where you're coming from?
 
Would you agree to making them play four years and working towards earning a degree, or is it strictly about the money from where you're coming from?

I think that makes a lot more sense than 3 years. The 3 year thing is so weird to me.

It's not so much just about the money as it's about allowing a free market... It basically comes down to NFL vet's and union trying to keep younger more healthy/talented kids from entereing their job market, along with the NCAA trying to make sure they cash in on their talents before leaving.

While I think 4 years would be bull shit also, at least that can be slightly justified by saying the education aspect is important. At 3 years, it makes no sense.
 
I think that makes a lot more sense than 3 years. The 3 year thing is so weird to me.

It's not so much just about the money as it's about allowing a free market... It basically comes down to NFL vet's and union trying to keep younger more healthy/talented kids from entereing their job market, along with the NCAA trying to make sure they cash in on their talents before leaving.

While I think 4 years would be bull **** also, at least that can be slightly justified by saying the education aspect is important. At 3 years, it makes no sense.

I happen to agree with the motives behind it all. So if three and four years are BS, how are one and two not BS?
 
They are. I don't agree with either... IMO 4 years is the least bad of all mandatory options.

What do you believe is the "motive" of 3 years, and why does that make sense?

I believe they initially wanted these guys to truly develop, because the NFL is a real man's game, and the strength and mental aspects simply wasn't there at 19 or 20 years old. With the development of the game, strength and conditioning, visability, complexity of offensive and defensive schemes, I feel like kids are way more equipped now than even in the early 2000's to go Pro early. So now I think the NCAA continues to uphold this three year limit as the ability to control their environment and be able to market a guy for atleast a three year period instead an influx of new names each and every year, so basically smaller turnover so they have a product they can actual market and sell.

The NFL, I agree with you about keeping too young of players out in hopes of creating a hair more longevity for the guys already in the league. I think it also poorly reflects on them when a guy leaves early and waste a career, time of organizations, and a ton of money simply because they can't handle the transition maturity wise.

Now if I had my way, I would force four years in school, and almost even want to make a point to have them graduate with something. Ultimately there will be more kids not playing football than the ones that can live and retire off of it. Using them as pawns and not caring about their real future is being hypocrytical of their message of student athletes. Of course there are a few guys that can leave early and thrive in a professional environment, but that percentage is so small that I would override that and make them get an education, because all it takes is one injury or bad investment and they're out on their ass with no money or education to get them a job, then they go back to the way of life most came from out of high school. I'm 32 years old, so no real old school train of thought, just a look at society and seeing where there are too many people mooching off the system instead of relying on an education to get a job. I guess I'm tired of society playing to the minority and allowing a select few dictate life for the masses, causing a rift amongst others. So that's why I say four years and everyone is better for it.
 
I personally think this new age thinking will ruin college athletics. They're being compensated, now whether or not it's to a scale that people like is a different story. We all could have a poker in that fire with how much our companies make off our backs compared to the compensation.

The point I take issue with is you saying that they could be forfeiting money instead of sitting out and being assured of that money. Isn't that setting up a precedent that will undoubtedly make the failure rate increase when these guys get a false sense of direction or an incorrect evaluation?

In the end, it doesn't matter what the NCAA, Universities, TV stations make off the back of these guys. They are applying for the opportunity to make millions. They are given the rare chance to jump straight to millionaires, so them following NCAA rules and playing three years is a small price to pay. All in all, it's like an internship, long hours, underpaid, and just fighting for the chance at a full time position. So if these guys sit out a year in efforts of staying injury free, would they need to pay back money to the NFL team's when they get injured since they can't perform their duties and hold up to their obligations? It's a slippery slope. I don't think you and I will agree on this issue, and that's fine, but I think it's all getting out of hand now with everyone holding their hand out wanting more, while it always ends up as us, the fans, being the ones that get stuck with the tab.

This.

The average fan is being priced out of being able to attend games unless they sell a kidney or take out a 2nd mortgage.
 
This.

The average fan is being priced out of being able to attend games unless they sell a kidney or take out a 2nd mortgage.
Buuuut.... You're paying to watch history. The schools with cheap tickets don't win big. Plus, if you want to pay less per ticket... Let the best players move on early and I guarantee you ticket prices go down.

Regardless... The consistent winner is the university. Super stars are helping raise the value of tickets, selling more jerseys, increasing parking costs, etc... And they don't make any more off your inflated ticket prices... But the university does.
 
Age to legally own a firearm is 17 in Louisiana & 18 in Alabama for what it's worth.

Things you learn with age, never sit in your car in a park at 2am with weed and guns. Being in the park at 2am is always going to create interest from people / cops.

Gil Brandt trolling Ole Miss fans today

 
@planomateo 18 in Alabama is the legal age to purchase long guns, ie rifles and shot guns. Ammunition falls in to this category along with air rifles and steel shot for sling shots.

21 is the legal age to purchase hand guns in Alabama.

I have no idea about Louisiana, but I would imagine the 17 is for long guns and not hand guns.........but that is total speculation on my part.
 
Cam Robinson and Hootie Jones are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. If it turns out that they are guilty of the charges, I hope they both get kicked off the team for good, but especially Cam Robinson----FELONY CHARGE!
 
@planomateo 18 in Alabama is the legal age to purchase long guns, ie rifles and shot guns. Ammunition falls in to this category along with air rifles and steel shot for sling shots.

21 is the legal age to purchase hand guns in Alabama.

I have no idea about Louisiana, but I would imagine the 17 is for long guns and not hand guns.........but that is total speculation on my part.

Ah, good point. I think LA is 17 for both. Not sure how I forgot about, it's a bit ironic that you can put your life on the line for the country serving in the military but I'll be damned if you can't carry a pistol/drink until you're 21.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom