Why sum are mad at Geo...

[Greene Rice FIG]

I am for players being allowed to earn money while in college. Just like all other students.

Schools sometimes pay grad students in some graduate programs, right? Not a lot, but some. I mean pay them a small salary above and beyond their scholarships, for scholarship students.

And schools compete with each other for research grants and for academic prestige. How is that different than sports?

There would be plenty of money of coaches didn't make so darn much. I don't have a solution for that.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

No, they paid $28 million for naming rights for a stadium, so their name will be mentioned every time there is a home game, across multiple newspapers, television stations, news programs, etc. If someone gave Ron Harper the million dollars, what additional value will be gained above and beyond what they purchased already? Getting to put his name and face on a billboard, or in a commercial? That doesn't carry nearly the same reach for value as your name being mentioned every time the arena is mentioned.

The value you are talking about is if they can woo some elite level players, there will be potentially more media coverage and more nationally televised games. But that is an incremental value, and it would need to prove out the ROI.

The value of the spot is variable based mostly on the performance of the team. 39-0 Rutgers gives Jersey Mike much more bang for the buck then 13-18 Rutgers.

I don't quite get the sneaker thing, but it is obvious it is a major revenue item and performance is important to the sneaker companies.

 

[mildone]

My son had his athletic program cut indirectly because football was too expensive. It will work it's way out for some, but we are going in the wrong direction.

I'll get off the soapbox.

That sucks. But lots of kids never even get to be college athletes at all. Despite them wanting to be picked up by a school to play sports. Which also sucks. Some kids get full ride scholarships, some go deep into debt.

Life isn’t fair. It can really suck sometimes. But that’s not a valid excuse, IMO, to take away the individual rights of those who get lucky.

 

[mildone]

There would be plenty of money of coaches didn't make so darn much. I don't have a solution for that.

Coaches work extremely hard and exist in very high stakes stressful jobs. There is so much money in college sports, I see no reason to begrudge them earning what they earn.

Everybody is free to choose what they want to do in life. If someone wants the salary of a CFB coach, they can choose to do that. A bit harder for women at the moment. But that’s changing now, some.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

That sucks. But lots of kids never even get to be college athletes at all. Despite them wanting to be picked up by a school to play sports. Which also sucks. Some kids get full ride scholarships, some go deep into debt.

Life isn’t fair. It can really suck sometimes. But that’s not a valid excuse, IMO, to take away the individual rights of those who get lucky.

Life isn't fair..........at least until lawyers realize the AD screwed up Title IX and the program gets reinstated 9 months later and the AD gets fired

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Coaches work extremely hard and exist in very high stakes stressful jobs. There is so much money in college sports, I see no reason to begrudge them earning what they earn.

Everybody is free to choose what they want to do in life. If someone wants the salary of a CFB coach, they can choose to do that. A bit harder for women at the moment. But that’s changing now, some.

So do your sheep

 

[mildone]

So do your sheep

😉

 

[RUChoppin]

The value of the spot is variable based mostly on the performance of the team. 39-0 Rutgers gives Jersey Mike much more bang for the buck then 13-18 Rutgers.

I don't quite get the sneaker thing, but it is obvious it is a major revenue item and performance is important to the sneaker companies.

The "much more bang for the buck" is what would need to be quantified. A 39-0 Rutgers doesn't get any more home games, for instance, so the amount of times a game is broadcast from "Jersey Mike's Arena" doesn't change based on our record. It might change how many games are broadcast on CBS vs. BTN, but that's also an incremental change - not every game will be a nationally televised one, even with a 39-0 squad. There would also be more mentions in-between games, and some more articles written, but that's also incremental difference.

The other thing is that you can't just "buy" a 39-0 squad. Even if you get a team loaded with one-and-done players, it's no guarantee you go undefeated (see: Kentucky) - and there's no guarantee you even get the wins you'd expect with the talent level on the roster. It'd essentially be corporate gambling - especially since that level of player likely doesn't stick around for more than 1-2 years, so the impact from the investment in any one player is fleeting.

And again, if that is a viable model, other corporations would do it - which would level the playing field, and make it less likely that any one team rises that much higher than others in the same conferences.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Nike and adidas would be better examples of what money can do to this game. Not overrated subs.

 

[RUChoppin]

Nike and adidas would be better examples of what money can do to this game. Not overrated subs.

Where the money's coming from doesn't really change much - paying a large sum to "sponsor" players is a gamble, and it would have to prove out an ROI.

A more realistic risk is that a wealthy donor sets up lucrative sponsorship deals for no benefit to a company, that they pay for out of their own pocket, knowing that they won't get any ROI on them and justifying them as a type of personal donation to the program. For instance, personally sponsoring a HS skills clinic and paying college players $$$ to lend their name/likeness to the event.

 

[bowlgoal]

Message to Geo! I hope you’re not reading the message boards but if you are; forget everything you read and go out and have fun again.

 

[RUBlackout]

Message to Geo! I hope you’re not reading the message boards but if you are; forget everything you read and go out and have fun again.

No better words written in the dumpster fire of a thread
Now I see why so many kids transfer when they get crucified by their own fanbase. geo has been nothing short of an amazing ambassador of this U and has led two teams to the NCAAs whether you want to believe that or not

/thread

 

[RutgersNo1]

I don't think anyone is mad at Geo personalty but some are disappointed that he isn't living up to their expectations as a player.
His NIL involvement does piss some off, but I feel that anger is more about the NIL itself and Geo is just getting hit in the crossfire because he's one of the leaders of the NIL movement.

Seems to be a reflection of a few things (none of which I think ought to cause people to dislike him, just summarizing what seems to be the feeling of some people):

1. He is historically a low-percentage shooter, and people also think he is weak in man defense
2. He is outspoken on issues like NIL
3. Some people believe that HE was one of the primary culprits of "chemistry" issues on the team last year, as he is one of Pike's "favorites" and thus received (in people's minds) preferential treatment over guys like Young and Mathis.

The stats are the stats, but I don't agree with the more intangible arguments about Geo. He seems like a good kid, a leader, and has been clutch for us.

Is Mr.Clutch going to step up tonight or what?