forums

New policy for Miami boosters

Advertisement
I saw this on ESPN a couple minutes ago. I have to say, I like it, because there is no reason to live in that gray area. It's just asking for trouble.
 
AutoCANE said:
I saw this on ESPN a couple minutes ago. I have to say, I like it, because there is no reason to live in that gray area. It's just asking for trouble.
Click to expand...

Yep, this is a good call. Perhaps it will catch on and become more than voluntary. Anything to get the $EC more in line is a good thing, IMHO.
 
I wouldn't mind if this was enforced by the NCAA. If Miami was doing it, just imagine what's going on at the SEC schools.
 
valid said:
I wouldn't mind if this was enforced by the NCAA. If Miami was doing it, just imagine what's going on at the SEC schools.
Click to expand...

The rule just seems so vague; unless ESPN is just making it seem that way.

"may receive an occasional meal from a representative of athletics interests on infrequent and special occasions."

What does that mean? Maybe infrequent is once a week to me, but once every few months to you? A special occasion is a birthday to me, but a team win to you. The rule is so vague and just leaves the door open for abuse.
 
Advertisement
mpatrizio said:
AutoCANE said:
I saw this on ESPN a couple minutes ago. I have to say, I like it, because there is no reason to live in that gray area. It's just asking for trouble.
Click to expand...

Yep, this is a good call. Perhaps it will catch on and become more than voluntary. Anything to get the $EC more in line is a good thing, IMHO.
Click to expand...

The way schools recruit in the SEC is engrained in their DNA, there is no changing that IMO. Glad to see UM take more proactive measures to show the NCAA that they are trying to deal with this issue seriously.
 
Until the SEC gets caught they are not going to change anything in fact they are using Miami's investigation
as a example to shore up it's illegal recruiting tactics..
 
Typical governmental over-reaction.


There is NOTHING wrong with a booster inviting an athlete over for dinner every once in a while. I remember being a scholarship athlete at Fresno State back in the mid 80's. I was 3000 miles from anything I called family. There were a couple families that were involved in the Fresno State soccer program back in the day. They would invite me over for dinner a couple times per semester. It felt really nice to get a break from dorm food and have a nice house to hang out in & watch TV for an evening.
 
SFbayCane said:
Typical governmental over-reaction.


There is NOTHING wrong with a booster inviting an athlete over for dinner every once in a while. I remember being a scholarship athlete at Fresno State back in the mid 80's. I was 3000 miles from anything I called family. There were a couple families that were involved in the Fresno State soccer program back in the day. They would invite me over for dinner a couple times per semester. It felt really nice to get a break from dorm food and have a nice house to hang out in & watch TV for an evening.
Click to expand...

Good thing I'm not a booster :p
 
Advertisement
I think the NCAA needs to figure out a better way of putting more money in the kids hands, these kids are making them money hand over fist. I don't know the right answer, but some of these kids have some very dire situations and I don't have much of a problem with them taking whatever money they can get.

Most of these people wouldn't ever want to walk a mile in these kids shoes, and to be honest, whatever they get, more power to them.
 
I agree h.

A $1500 - $2000 annual stipend per athlete is not excessive, especially since they are forbidden from earning a living during the school year.
 
SFbayCane said:
I agree h.

A $1500 - $2000 annual stipend per athlete is not excessive, especially since they are forbidden from earning a living during the school year.
Click to expand...

Problem is Title IX. Whatever men get, females have to get as well...even if they don't deserve it (they don't).

Back to the OP, this is a great PR move for Miami giving the NCAA another reason not to hammer us sanctions-wise.
 
Advertisement
great move. *we are not the only ones dealing with public perception, so is the ncaa. *Public perception has been that Miami has always been out of control, but if we make ourselves look better, the ncaa won't feel as much pressure to hammer us.
 
Advertisement
DiegoCane said:
UMJer026 said:
So why become a "booster" then?
Click to expand...

To support your team.

Never understood the need for 40 and 50 year old men to hang out with 18 year old football players anyway.

But I agree, I think its an overreaction.
Click to expand...

you eventually will be a 40 and 50 year old man and you will still be loving the Canes when you are 40 and 50. why wouldnt you want to have have lunch with a Duke Johnson, Perryman or Chick?
 
DiegoCane said:
UMJer026 said:
So why become a "booster" then?
Click to expand...

To support your team.

Never understood the need for 40 and 50 year old men to hang out with 18 year old football players anyway.

But I agree, I think its an overreaction.
Click to expand...

Nah, you missed my point.

IF IF IF someone is inclined to be the type of "booster" that provides certain benefits to student athletes, then why not just avoid the "booster" tag altogether? Don't give money to the school, just give it to the players. This is how they make it work in the SEC.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top