Former Illini in College Hoops

#301      
I literally started off my last post with "I didn't say they should be paid less." I said that because it's true and I because I don't believe it. Why is that so hard for you to understand? The gap seems to be that you seem to be reading something into my post that isn't there and refuse to actually read and understand the words that are there.
Look, it’s been a long day and I’d rather discuss puppies at this point. I guess what I’m missing is how the ability of teams to properly “value” players is relevant unless we’re talking about compensation, and if we’re taking about compensation in that context, aren’t we talking about players being overpaid?

Maybe not. I apologize if I missed the point.
 
#303      

Chad Fleck

Eureka, IL
OK, it's still unclear to me as to why the players should be paid less because the teams can't figure out what they're worth. Anyway, we're never going to close the gap on this, so why not talk about something we can agree on: isn't this picture of puppies in a bucket cute?

View attachment 29570
They probably come from some puppy mill!

I blame congress.

Or maybe the NCAA?

I don't know. 🤷‍♂️🤪
 
#304      
Look, it’s been a long day and I’d rather discuss puppies at this point. I guess what I’m missing is how the ability of teams to properly “value” players is relevant unless we’re talking about compensation, and if we’re taking about compensation in that context, aren’t we talking about players being overpaid?

Maybe not. I apologize if I missed the point.
Of course some players are going to be over paid according to their value. Look at the public database of nba salaries. The goal is to avoid that. There's nothing wrong with saying you want Shannon to make more than Goode and you want leadership that makes that happen. I think we all want to avoid bad payouts. But they're bound to happen.

Once again I'm not suggesting anyone stop this other than my team be smart and avoid them. If next year some team wants to pay Goode 3 times what Shannon makes more power to Luke. I'll be glad it's not us.

The problem will be accurately figuring out the value of a guy like Skyy Clark who still might be on our payroll if we had been allowed to contract with him.
 
#306      
Of course some players are going to be over paid according to their value. Look at the public database of nba salaries. The goal is to avoid that. There's nothing wrong with saying you want Shannon to make more than Goode and you want leadership that makes that happen. I think we all want to avoid bad payouts. But they're bound to happen.

Once again I'm not suggesting anyone stop this other than my team be smart and avoid them. If next year some team wants to pay Goode 3 times what Shannon makes more power to Luke. I'll be glad it's not us.

The problem will be accurately figuring out the value of a guy like Skyy Clark who still might be on our payroll if we had been allowed to contract with him.
Fair enough. I personally don't think that's all that far removed from the resource allocation decisions coaching staffs needed to make back in the old days (i.e. 'wasting a ride' on a guy who wasn't allowed to freely transfer, etc.) and it's not really my bag, but I guess I'm always in favor of Illinois maximizing their chances to win.
 
#308      
Fair enough. I personally don't think that's all that far removed from the resource allocation decisions coaching staffs needed to make back in the old days (i.e. 'wasting a ride' on a guy who wasn't allowed to freely transfer, etc.) and it's not really my bag, but I guess I'm always in favor of Illinois maximizing their chances to win.
You're right. This dynamic has always existed. But we've routinely coaxed guys out of their scholarship to go to another school. Try coaxing a five star bust out of his contract.
 
#309      
1703189229997.png
 
#311      
Louisville is still terrible, but Clark is getting tick and shots, which is probably all that matters to him. Bets on whether he sticks around after Payne gets fired?
 
#315      
So since transfer limits are not allowed, how far are we from having the 4 year eligibility thrown out? We could see a 40 year old JCL in the portal making more in NIL $ that he could with his 12 degrees….

Yep, in my opinion, this is one of the next dominoes to fall. Similar to the multi year transfee case, the NCAA has been inconsistent in enforcement of their 4 year eligibility rule and as there are a number of examples of players both playing for more than 4 years as well as no limits to age or experience, all it will take is a lawsuit for this to fall as well. In which case you effectively now have a D-League.

I also think the "hiring an agent" loss of eligibility rule is also ripe for the picking as keeping an athlete from doing that restricts that athlete from knowing and understanding their true market value.

And while this one is a long shot right now, there could in theory be an argument that NIL is a form of payment for basketball services as a workaround attempt to state that those who receive NIL are technically professionals in which case it would open the door to allowing former pros to enroll back in college and play NCAA ball, in which case recruiting a "more athletic Larry Bird" may actually be, uh, well, Larry Bird.
 
#316      
Yep, in my opinion, this is one of the next dominoes to fall. Similar to the multi year transfee case, the NCAA has been inconsistent in enforcement of their 4 year eligibility rule and as there are a number of examples of players both playing for more than 4 years as well as no limits to age or experience, all it will take is a lawsuit for this to fall as well. In which case you effectively now have a D-League.

I also think the "hiring an agent" loss of eligibility rule is also ripe for the picking as keeping an athlete from doing that restricts that athlete from knowing and understanding their true market value.

And while this one is a long shot right now, there could in theory be an argument that NIL is a form of payment for basketball services as a workaround attempt to state that those who receive NIL are technically professionals in which case it would open the door to allowing former pros to enroll back in college and play NCAA ball, in which case recruiting a "more athletic Larry Bird" may actually be, uh, well, Larry Bird.
Let's march toward 82 games a year in B1G!
 
#317      
I had a chance to catch up on some games since there haven't been any this week up until today. I watched Northwestern and Arizona St from last week and noticed an Adam Miller sighting. I believe it was just his second game back since that court ruling. He only had 6 pts but was a focal point and took 10 shots in that game. He also started the second half when Bobby Hurley benched most of his starters after their awful 13 pt first half but did start Miller in both halves. I expect Miller to be a major part of their team since he had 20 pts. in his first game vs TCU. ASU is probably going nowhere but it'll be interesting to see if Miller can resurrect his career
 
#319      

Ransom Stoddard

Ordained Dudeist Priest
Bloomington, IL
Curbelo had a stat stuffing game last night. 13 points, 10 rebounds, and 11 assists. 5-21 from the field. Always erratic but exciting.
According to his stats on espn.com he's missed 10 games this season. Does anyone know why?
 
#322      
According to his stats on espn.com he's missed 10 games this season. Does anyone know why?
Because the NCAA blocked his elgibility to play due to it being his second transfer; however a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring the ncaa from requiring athletes to sit out a year after a second transfer saying it violated federal anti-trust laws. Therefore that made all the 2 time transferees immediately elgible and the courts also said the NCAA can't punish the athletes on the back-end if the final ruling is to the contrary.
 
#325      
Because the NCAA blocked his elgibility to play due to it being his second transfer; however a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring the ncaa from requiring athletes to sit out a year after a second transfer saying it violated federal anti-trust laws. Therefore that made all the 2 time transferees immediately elgible and the courts also said the NCAA can't punish the athletes on the back-end if the final ruling is to the contrary.
IANAL and I haven't heard anything about this until reading this post right now. So does this mean players can transfer unlimited times?