2018 Draft Thread I

[big9erfan]

2 hours ago, Forge said:

I'm not going to lie...I just don't care if it's a disaster for college football lol, and neither should these players. These players should be looking out for themselves first and foremost, so I have no issues with what they are doing, or if they preferred to skip more than just a meaningless bowl game. That's completely up to them. 

Well I'm speaking as a fan, not a player. 

I do understand the ecomomics and the point you're making.  But I have to wonder about the bolded.  You're exactly right, but what does mean in a team sport?  You're saying it's OK to put  your financial future ahead of the team.  So what if you're in the final year of your contract and you've had a good half season or 10 games.  Maybe you should just check out of the final few games so you don't blow your chances for that next big contract.  Isn't that also just "looking out for themselves first and foremost"? That's what I meant by "slippery slope".  Once you start thinking it's OK to put your self interest ahead of the team I'm not sure where that attitude ends. Also just for a different perspective - if you're heading on to the NFL a bowl game might be meaningless TO YOU, but for most of the guys who aren't moving on it might be their final game and I'm sure they would like to go out with a win. T

[rudyZ]

3 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Well I'm speaking as a fan, not a player. 

I do understand the ecomomics and the point you're making.  But I have to wonder about the bolded.  You're exactly right, but what does mean in a team sport?  You're saying it's OK to put  your financial future ahead of the team.  So what if you're in the final year of your contract and you've had a good half season or 10 games.  Maybe you should just check out of the final few games so you don't blow your chances for that next big contract.  Isn't that also just "looking out for themselves first and foremost"? That's what I meant by "slippery slope".  Once you start thinking it's OK to put your self interest ahead of the team I'm not sure where that attitude ends.

I think the only way this trend could be reversed is if it had an impact on the scouts evaluation. If all 32 teams start devaluing prospects for skipping games, then they'd stop doing it. But I don't see it happening, so I guess I'll use it to gauge one player's competitive fire next to another. Who loves football and competition more: Christian McCaffrey or Solomon Thomas? It's not a perfect metric, but if these things get discussed more, maybe attitudes will change.

[big9erfan]

42 minutes ago, Ronnie's Pinky said:

Considering that the NCAA/NFL system is basically set up to make young football players indentured servants for the first 3-4 years of their careers, and then underpaid for the next four, I have no problem with the employee in this scenario making a business decision to his own benefit. The players owe less than nothing to the universities in question, and the public's enjoyment of college football doesn't change what goes into their pockets in any way, as they are already earning a pittance for their labor while in college.

In fact, falling profitability/interest in college football might very well be a good thing for college football players. There is very little about the current system which actually works in their best interests.

The point I made to Forge is that once you believe it's OK "in this scenario" then I have a hard time finding any scenario in which it's not OK. What's the future of any team sport if everyone playing it is only interested in their own self interest and benefit?

As an  aside you might look into the average cost of a college education these days, and to the benefits of a college education.  To begin with lots and lots, probably the majority, of kids getting into college on football scholarships wouldn't be getting in at all, or going to college, without playing football.  And those that do would be paying upwards of $100,000 for that education, much more than that in many cases. Then take into accout the average increase in lifetime earnings of people with college educations compared to less education than that.  According to the Social Security administration that difference is $900,000.  Add in the cost of the education itself and you're over one million dollars! You must have a differnt defintion of "pittance" than I do

[big9erfan]

6 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

The point I made to Forge is that once you believe it's OK "in this scenario" then I have a hard time finding any scenario in which it's not OK. What's the future of any team sport if everyone playing it is only interested in their own self interest and benefit?

As an  aside you might look into the average cost of a college education these days, and to the benefits of a college education.  To begin with lots and lots, probably the majority, of kids getting into college on football scholarships wouldn't be getting in at all, or going to college, without playing football.  And those that do would be paying upwards of $100,000 for that education, much more than that in many cases. Then take into accout the average increase in lifetime earnings of people with college educations compared to less education than that.  According to the Social Security administration that difference is $900,000.  Add in the cost of the education itself and you're over one million dollars! Then of course you have the handful who do make it in the NFL and earn millions, based on the free training they got in their chosen profession while they were in college.  I mean they could just sit out three years guaranteeing no career ending injury and then enter the draft, right?  The problem with that is no one will draft them. So for that small handful you have many millions of dollars. That makes a million on the low end and tens of millions, even 100+ million on the high end! You must have a differnt defintion of "pittance" than I do

 

[Forge]

18 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Well I'm speaking as a fan, not a player. 

I do understand the ecomomics and the point you're making.  But I have to wonder about the bolded.  You're exactly right, but what does mean in a team sport?  You're saying it's OK to put  your financial future ahead of the team.  So what if you're in the final year of your contract and you've had a good half season or 10 games.  Maybe you should just check out of the final few games so you don't blow your chances for that next big contract.  Isn't that also just "looking out for themselves first and foremost"? That's what I meant by "slippery slope".  Once you start thinking it's OK to put your self interest ahead of the team I'm not sure where that attitude ends. Also just for a different perspective - if you're heading on to the NFL a bowl game might be meaningless TO YOU, but for most of the guys who aren't moving on it might be their final game and I'm sure they would like to go out with a win. T

To the bolded,, not my problem. I'm not responsible for the other players' happiness. 

And again, have no issues with them sitting out before their contract if that's what they want to do, though at the NFL level, that's a job, so you're going to lose pay, etc. And you have to keep in mind that teams will evaluate that for what they offer for you on your services. If you're willing to take that chance, more power to you. 

[Forge]

11 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

The point I made to Forge is that once you believe it's OK "in this scenario" then I have a hard time finding any scenario in which it's not OK. What's the future of any team sport if everyone playing it is only interested in their own self interest and benefit?

As an  aside you might look into the average cost of a college education these days, and to the benefits of a college education.  To begin with lots and lots, probably the majority, of kids getting into college on football scholarships wouldn't be getting in at all, or going to college, without playing football.  And those that do would be paying upwards of $100,000 for that education, much more than that in many cases. Then take into accout the average increase in lifetime earnings of people with college educations compared to less education than that.  According to the Social Security administration that difference is $900,000.  Add in the cost of the education itself and you're over one million dollars! You must have a differnt defintion of "pittance" than I do

Completely unsubstantiated. You have no idea on that which renders the entire point about increased future earnings moot. 

Also, cost of education is relative. You can go to a state school for a lot less. 

[big9erfan]

8 minutes ago, Forge said:

To the bolded,, not my problem. I'm not responsible for the other players' happiness. 

And again, have no issues with them sitting out before their contract if that's what they want to do, though at the NFL level, that's a job, so you're going to lose pay, etc. And you have to keep in mind that teams will evaluate that for what they offer for you on your services. If you're willing to take that chance, more power to you. 

That sounds to me an awful lot like "screw my teammates; it's all about me". You're a player.  Do you want a guy like that on your team?

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

That sounds to me an awful lot like "screw my teammates; it's all about me". You're a player.  Do you want a guy like that on your team?

It should be all about them. They're the ones risking millions of dollars...not the third string left guard that he barely knows. 

Also, you can't switch midstream. I'm not talking about teams, nor have we been talking about teams and how they evaluate prospects or what kind of people they want on their team. They can evaluate however they prefer. If that matters to them, fine, adjust him on the board accordingly. That is their right just like it's the player's right to treat this like a business and carry himself accordingly.  Didn't seem to hurt McCaffrey last year though. 

[big9erfan]

5 minutes ago, Forge said:

Completely unsubstantiated. You have no idea on that which renders the entire point about increased future earnings moot. 

Also, cost of education is relative. You can go to a state school for a lot less. 

Actuallty I do.  There are sources out there that will give you the average GPAs and SAT scores of athletes, compared to the rest of the students accepted. On average they are a lot lower.  It's quite clear that lots and lots of them would not be getting in without football scholarships.  I was careful to say "lots and lots, probably the majority" because I don't have the precise number.  But the difference in scores is so overwhelming that it has to be quite a large number. Would some get in anyway? Sure. Would some go to a 2-year school? Sure. But it's a fact that lots and lots would not get in or not choose to go to college (and I think it's a pretty fair guess that it could well be the majority). Not knowing the exact number does not make the point moot. 

As for college costs,  I think you're underestimating what college costs these days. You're welcome to look up other colleges but here are a few examples.  The estimated annual education expense for in state UCLA students is close to $34K per year - which if math serves me is around $136K if you get through in 4 years.The out of state costs are estimated at close to $62K a year which comes darn close to a quarter million dollars for a 4-year education. For Michigan it's about $30K per year in state and $60K out of state. At Texas it's about $25K in state and $50K out of state. For Ohio State it's $27K in state and $46 out of state (the majority of OSU scholarships go to out of state kids).

[Forge]

25 minutes ago, big9erfan said:

Actuallty I do.  There are sources out there that will give you the average GPAs and SAT scores of athletes, compared to the rest of the students accepted. On average they are a lot lower.  It's quite clear that lots and lots of them would not be getting in without football scholarships.  I was careful to say "lots and lots, probably the majority" because I don't have the precise number.  But the difference in scores is so overwhelming that it has to be quite a large number. Would some get in anyway? Sure. Would some go to a 2-year school? Sure. But it's a fact that lots and lots would not get in or not choose to go to college (and I think it's a pretty fair guess that it could well be the majority). Not knowing the exact number does not make the point moot. 

As for college costs,  I think you're underestimating what college costs these days. You're welcome to look up other colleges but here are a few examples.  The estimated annual education expense for in state UCLA students is close to $34K per year - which if math serves me is around $136K if you get through in 4 years.The out of state costs are estimated at close to $62K a year which comes darn close to a quarter million dollars for a 4-year education. For Michigan it's about $30K per year in state and $60K out of state. At Texas it's about $25K in state and $50K out of state. For Ohio State it's $27K in state and $46 out of state (the majority of OSU scholarships go to out of state kids).

Yes, it does render it moot. You're using what you think, that most of them would not get in (which you have no idea on unless you happen to know the acceptance parameters for every college in america, every gpa, sat score, extra curricular for every high school athlete) or (and this is the important part) choose not to go. You have no idea how many would choose to go and not go. Yes, they could start at a 2 year school and move up. Yes, some of them will get in anyway. You have no way to quantify the number of kids who would or would not choose to go to college without football. It's all guess work on your part. I'll tell you what...interview every college athlete from 2017, and ask them if they would have went to college. if 50.01% say no, I'll agree with your premise. 

Your figures are the total cost of attendance, which is different from tuition. Ohio State's tuition I believe is just shy of 11k. You can go to a regional campus for less than 8.  Mississippi's average in state tuition is a little over 7k a year. Same for North Carolina. UNLV is 8K a year. Room and board is not a necessity (and that is included in that 27K you quoted). Various fees can depend on what program your in. That typically builds in a cost of books, but that would be like including the cost of your gas into the purchase price of your car. You have to pay rent / mortgage wherever you are, that's not exclusive to colleges. If someone when to Ohio State and lived off campus and paid rent of 1k a month, you wouldn't consider that part of the tuition. 

[big9erfan]

30 minutes ago, Forge said:

It should be all about them. They're the ones risking millions of dollars...not the third string left guard that he barely knows. 

Also, you can't switch midstream. I'm not talking about teams, nor have we been talking about teams and how they evaluate prospects or what kind of people they want on their team. They can evaluate however they prefer. If that matters to them, fine, adjust him on the board accordingly. That is their right just like it's the player's right to treat this like a business and carry himself accordingly.  Didn't seem to hurt McCaffrey last year though. 

Interesting that you see talking about individual's players attitudes as not being a discussion about the team.  Why did one of the Giants just call  one of his teammates "a cancer"? Because how individuals act, how they treat their teammates, and how hard they're willing to work to win is very much a matter of the team. Didn't you say somethere along the way that you did some coaching (or was it just playing)?  Was your message to the team that it's every man or kid for himself out there?  The team means nothing; only what's good for you matters?  I understand the ecomomics; and still I don't understand that attitude.

 

[Forge]

1 minute ago, big9erfan said:

Interesting that you see talking about individual's players attitudes as not being a discussion about the team.  Why did one of the Giants just call  one of his teammates "a cancer"? Because how individuals act, how they treat their teammates, and how hard they're willing to work to win is very much a matter of the team. Didn't you say somethere along the way that you did some coaching (or was it just playing)?  Was your message to the team that it's every man or kid for himself out there?  The team means nothing; only what's good for you matters?  I understand the ecomomics; and still I don't understand that attitude.

 

Your original post was about kids sitting out bowl games...you're the one going off on this tangent with other stuff. I have no issue with them sitting out bowl games or other games in the name of protecting themselves. This other stuff about how teams feel about is a completely different matter and not the same as your original post and what I was replying to. 

Teams are free to evaluate that stuff as they see fit, I have no problem with that either. If a kid sits out a bowl game and they have an issue with it, good for them. If they don't, good for them. 

[John232]

I'm still low key salty about not drafting Carl Lawson with our fourth round pick. 

[big9erfan]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

Yes, it does render it moot. You're using what you think, that most of them would not get in (which you have no idea on unless you happen to know the acceptance parameters for every college in america, every gpa, sat score, extra curricular for every high school athlete) or (and this is the important part) choose not to go. You have no idea how many would choose to go and not go. Yes, they could start at a 2 year school and move up. Yes, some of them will get in anyway. You have no way to quantify the number of kids who would or would not go to college without football. It's all guess work on your part. I'll tell you what...interview every college athlete from 2017, and ask them if they would have went to college. if 50.01% say no, I'll agree with your premise. 

Your figures are the total cost of attendance, which is different from tuition. Ohio State's tuition I believe is just shy of 11k. You can go to a regional campus for less than 8.  Mississippi's average in state tuition is a little over 7k a year. Same for North Carolina. UNLV is 8K a year. Room and board is not a necessity (and that is included in that 27K you quoted). Various fees can depend on what program your in. That typically builds in a cost of books, but that would be like including the cost of your gas into the purchase price of your car. You have to pay rent / mortgage wherever you are, that's not exclusive to colleges. If someone when to Ohio State and lived off campus and paid rent of 1k a month, you wouldn't consider that part of the tuition. 

Full athletic scholarships include room and board, and books, and fees, and some incidentals, not just tuition.  The average esimated cost of attending a college is indeed mostly covered by the scholarship.  If you're not on scholarship, or not in college you pay for these things yourself.  If you're on football scholarship you don't. If you're in college not on scholarship you buy your own books (not covered by fees, books are a separate cost of collegge). If you're on a football scholarship you don't. There are subtle extra value that no study is likely to cover, like far better food than what the typical student gets for their "board" , personal trainers almost every day of the year, access to better summer jobs than most other students get. It goes on and on. 

This is a silly discussion.  You obviously aren't believing me. So google it yourself.  There are plenty of sites I found that explain this fully. In fact I found one that specifically estimated the average value of a football scholarship across all FBS schools. The average value was listed as $36,070.  A word of warning about your research though - if you don't want your biases about this issue challenged you might stay away from the Forbes article from a few years back titled "Value of College Football Scholarship Exceeds $2 Million for College Football's Top 25"

[Forge]

1 hour ago, big9erfan said:

 

This is a silly discussion.  You obviously aren't believing me. So google it yourself.  There are plenty of sites I found that explain this fully. In fact I found one that specifically estimated the average value of a football scholarship across all FBS schools. The average value was listed as $36,070.  A word of warning a"bout your research though - if you don't want your biases about this issue challenged you might stay away from the Forbes article from a few years back titled "Value of College Football Scholarship Exceeds $2 Million for College Football's Top 25"

I believe you just fine. The bulk of that 2 million they're reporting  I believe comes from potential higher future earnings (potential being the key word)...which again, assumes that none of these kids are going to college without football, which flaws the argument right off the bat, and I wouldn't consider "potential future earnings" a monetized aspect of a football scholarship. 

 

1 hour ago, big9erfan said:

Full athletic scholarships include room and board, and books, and fees, and some incidentals, not just tuition.  The average esimated cost of attending a college is indeed mostly covered by the scholarship.  If you're not on scholarship, or not in college you pay for these things yourself.  If you're on football scholarship you don't. If you're in college not on scholarship you buy your own books (not covered by fees, books are a separate cost of collegge). If you're on a football scholarship you don't. There are subtle extra value that no study is likely to cover, like far better food than what the typical student gets for their "board" , personal trainers almost every day of the year, access to better summer jobs than most other students get. It goes on and on. 

Yes, they do...but that's not what my comment was about, was it? You said that said these kids would pay 100K for college...I corrected you and said that was relative (which it is), without football. What the scholarship covers has absolutely nothing to do with what I was responding to or talking about. This was your quote:

3 hours ago, big9erfan said:

And those that do would be paying upwards of $100,000 for that education, much more than that in many cases

My tuition comment was directed at this. There are ways to get around 100K "and much more", depending on where you go, where you stay, etc. This is extremely relative...which is what I said to begin with. 

 

But agree to disagree. We have never agreed on much of anything before, no reason to start now lol. Otherwise, there would be no fun here. We are both free to feel as we do. We did veer way off topic here lol.