Haven't read the full thread.

But I hate it when people chew gum. It's 10 times worse when people smack it. I just find it so disgusting and rude.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish American society didn't put athletes and those in the entertainment industry on pedestals.

Oh, I completely agree. And don't think they deserve to make the sickening amounts of money they make. Our priorities are completely out of whack.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I think college athlete who pull in major money for universities should be able to make some sort of profit.

Fuck no. The athlete worship in this country is insane. WHO CARES if you can throw a ball, you're not saving lives.

NFL should not be a tax-exempt organization. We should cap players' salaries.

Aside from a free ride and some campus celebrity, unless a player makes it to the pros, college football players at big name schools are used and spit out by the schools. Winning teams make millions of dollars each season for schools without having to pay players.

Aside from a free ride? A free ride has significant monetary value, and I think that's enough as "payment" for college football players. Most of the best players choose schools out of state -- even state schools out of state can be 50k with room and board, food etc. 50k over 4 years is 200k. At D1 schools esp the ones that are football obsessed, players get a lot of free "stuff." I know Penn State the best and know a few guys on that team. They get a ton of free clothing, and I'm not suggesting just a few PSU football sweatshirts. Everything from multiple pairs of sneakers to backpacks to athletic gear to winter coats are provided to them; I'm sure the NCAA has a cap but conservatively I'd say it can't be less than 2k of stuff per year. You could practically move your son into the dorms with one pair of clothing on his back, and the rest would be taken care of. This year the school got all of the football players (and all athletes) i-pads. When they made a bowl game this year, they got a swag bag consisting of the usual sweatshirts/hats etc. but also an apple TV, Bluetooth speakers, and gift cards in addition to a week in NYC; sure they practiced during the week, but they also got to see shows, do touristy things and eat at nice restaurants -- all of which costs money; so there's another 1-2k per player. The university (or maybe the NCAA) has now also decided to provide additional food beyond just providing a meal plan, so there's an endless supply of snacks and drinks available to athletes in their athletic facilities -- so there's another few hundred dollars/month that students don't have to spend on snacks and meal supplements for after practice. While all these "extras" seem small, they add up to about 5k/yr combined -- 20k over 4 years.

I'd say 220k over 4 years is plenty of payment to a football player, even if the program is making millions. If that's not enough for their "talent," they're not compelled to play college ball, they can take their talent straight to the NFL draft if anyone will have them. And remember not every player is a starter that's generating ticket sales; I could see those guys feeling like they deserve more but half the team or more is on the practice squad and they get the same benefits.

They don't get to choose their majors. The athletic department chooses it for them based on their training and travel schedule. As you can imagine, the athletes and not just football players, but baseball, tennis, basketball, soccer are pushed into less demanding majors like sports management opposed to physical therapy. So, is it really a free-ride?

Unless something changed dramatically since I went to college, you get to chose your major. I played* (ok practiced) D1 football for a top 20 team in the early 80s. My major was Physics. I didn't play much -- I was a line backer, but only came in during mop up situations....But, I did get my degree in Physics. And I now work as a research scientist.

FWIW, I am kind of glad I did not play much, as (in hind sight) I never got hurt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish American society didn't put athletes and those in the entertainment industry on pedestals.

Oh, I completely agree. And don't think they deserve to make the sickening amounts of money they make. Our priorities are completely out of whack.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I think college athlete who pull in major money for universities should be able to make some sort of profit.

Fuck no. The athlete worship in this country is insane. WHO CARES if you can throw a ball, you're not saving lives.

NFL should not be a tax-exempt organization. We should cap players' salaries.

Aside from a free ride and some campus celebrity, unless a player makes it to the pros, college football players at big name schools are used and spit out by the schools. Winning teams make millions of dollars each season for schools without having to pay players.

Aside from a free ride? A free ride has significant monetary value, and I think that's enough as "payment" for college football players. Most of the best players choose schools out of state -- even state schools out of state can be 50k with room and board, food etc. 50k over 4 years is 200k. At D1 schools esp the ones that are football obsessed, players get a lot of free "stuff." I know Penn State the best and know a few guys on that team. They get a ton of free clothing, and I'm not suggesting just a few PSU football sweatshirts. Everything from multiple pairs of sneakers to backpacks to athletic gear to winter coats are provided to them; I'm sure the NCAA has a cap but conservatively I'd say it can't be less than 2k of stuff per year. You could practically move your son into the dorms with one pair of clothing on his back, and the rest would be taken care of. This year the school got all of the football players (and all athletes) i-pads. When they made a bowl game this year, they got a swag bag consisting of the usual sweatshirts/hats etc. but also an apple TV, Bluetooth speakers, and gift cards in addition to a week in NYC; sure they practiced during the week, but they also got to see shows, do touristy things and eat at nice restaurants -- all of which costs money; so there's another 1-2k per player. The university (or maybe the NCAA) has now also decided to provide additional food beyond just providing a meal plan, so there's an endless supply of snacks and drinks available to athletes in their athletic facilities -- so there's another few hundred dollars/month that students don't have to spend on snacks and meal supplements for after practice. While all these "extras" seem small, they add up to about 5k/yr combined -- 20k over 4 years.

I'd say 220k over 4 years is plenty of payment to a football player, even if the program is making millions. If that's not enough for their "talent," they're not compelled to play college ball, they can take their talent straight to the NFL draft if anyone will have them. And remember not every player is a starter that's generating ticket sales; I could see those guys feeling like they deserve more but half the team or more is on the practice squad and they get the same benefits.

They don't get to choose their majors. The athletic department chooses it for them based on their training and travel schedule. As you can imagine, the athletes and not just football players, but baseball, tennis, basketball, soccer are pushed into less demanding majors like sports management opposed to physical therapy. So, is it really a free-ride?

They don't get to choose their majors? Really.

This comment is so insane I can't even stand it. Yet another example of people on this site chiming in about sports or any topic really,about which they are completely uninformed.

Seriously?? Yes -- they get to pick their own majors. I say this having known students in big time revenue generating football programs as well as non revenue generating sports at other schools -- all D1. Now if you're commenting on the fact that you don't see a lot of football players in pre-med or engineering and it's because coaches don't allow it -- I think it's more of a function of the amount of time big time football takes up and how the athletes are themselves. Sure there are coaches who would (and do) "discourage" classes that take up too much time, require a ton of studying, lab courses etc. bc they eat into the student's time and "distract" them from football. But coaches can in no way disallow you from being a bio major on a premed track if you so choose. At most coaches can (and do) control the students' schedules. So they can require that everyone has to be available from 6-9 am for morning practice and from 4-8 pm for nighttime practice or whatever, and you have to work your schedule around that. Only the most committed students will be willing to deal with a hard academic schedule on top of that, and many of them get quite creative about it -- loading up on harder classes during the off season and saving electives for the football season; taking summer sessions every year etc.

I've seen guys pursue hard majors, even if it pissed off the coach that the student wouldn't make it to "optional" practices or lifting sessions because they had to study or had a 3 hour lab 3 afternoons a week. Typically it's the guys who view (and their families) view football as a vehicle to get a good education, not as a vehicle to the NFL. So it's often guys who are second team/third team/practice squad and know they aren't going to see much or any playing time. I've even seen guys choose hard majors when they are on the cusp of making it to the starting team bc they have the view -- if my lack of commitment pisses off the coach and he keeps me off the field, fine, I'm here for a free education and to make sure I get to med school or that job at Microsoft or whatever.

Of course you see tons of starters majoring in Tourism Management or Sports Management or Communications or other non specific areas, but that's often a telltale sign that they are viewing college as a tool to get them to the NFL and they want to spend as little time as possible on the school part; they don't think about -- what happens if I don't make it; if I make it and get injured or cut right away etc. Do coaches "encourage" this kind of thinking -- at many/most schools yes bc they want their starting QB to have his head in the playbook, not in the chemistry book. But if that starting QB says -- sorry coach, I'm going to be a finance major and btw -- this summer during our 6 weeks off, instead of working out full time with a personal trainer to prep for training camp, I am pursuing a 40 hr week internship with Merrill Lynch and then I'll work out at night -- there's nothing a coach can do to stop that either -- esp if the player isn't scared of losing a starting spot or seeing less playing time.

I think our current FLOTUS is the best one so far.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish American society didn't put athletes and those in the entertainment industry on pedestals.

Oh, I completely agree. And don't think they deserve to make the sickening amounts of money they make. Our priorities are completely out of whack.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I think college athlete who pull in major money for universities should be able to make some sort of profit.

Fuck no. The athlete worship in this country is insane. WHO CARES if you can throw a ball, you're not saving lives.

NFL should not be a tax-exempt organization. We should cap players' salaries.

Aside from a free ride and some campus celebrity, unless a player makes it to the pros, college football players at big name schools are used and spit out by the schools. Winning teams make millions of dollars each season for schools without having to pay players.

Aside from a free ride? A free ride has significant monetary value, and I think that's enough as "payment" for college football players. Most of the best players choose schools out of state -- even state schools out of state can be 50k with room and board, food etc. 50k over 4 years is 200k. At D1 schools esp the ones that are football obsessed, players get a lot of free "stuff." I know Penn State the best and know a few guys on that team. They get a ton of free clothing, and I'm not suggesting just a few PSU football sweatshirts. Everything from multiple pairs of sneakers to backpacks to athletic gear to winter coats are provided to them; I'm sure the NCAA has a cap but conservatively I'd say it can't be less than 2k of stuff per year. You could practically move your son into the dorms with one pair of clothing on his back, and the rest would be taken care of. This year the school got all of the football players (and all athletes) i-pads. When they made a bowl game this year, they got a swag bag consisting of the usual sweatshirts/hats etc. but also an apple TV, Bluetooth speakers, and gift cards in addition to a week in NYC; sure they practiced during the week, but they also got to see shows, do touristy things and eat at nice restaurants -- all of which costs money; so there's another 1-2k per player. The university (or maybe the NCAA) has now also decided to provide additional food beyond just providing a meal plan, so there's an endless supply of snacks and drinks available to athletes in their athletic facilities -- so there's another few hundred dollars/month that students don't have to spend on snacks and meal supplements for after practice. While all these "extras" seem small, they add up to about 5k/yr combined -- 20k over 4 years.

I'd say 220k over 4 years is plenty of payment to a football player, even if the program is making millions. If that's not enough for their "talent," they're not compelled to play college ball, they can take their talent straight to the NFL draft if anyone will have them. And remember not every player is a starter that's generating ticket sales; I could see those guys feeling like they deserve more but half the team or more is on the practice squad and they get the same benefits.

They don't get to choose their majors. The athletic department chooses it for them based on their training and travel schedule. As you can imagine, the athletes and not just football players, but baseball, tennis, basketball, soccer are pushed into less demanding majors like sports management opposed to physical therapy. So, is it really a free-ride?

They don't get to choose their majors? Really.

This comment is so insane I can't even stand it. Yet another example of people on this site chiming in about sports or any topic really,about which they are completely uninformed.

Anonymous wrote:"Spirited child" tells people you haven't figured out how to manage your kid yet. This is not a diagnosis of any kind and doesn't give you the right to expect an IEP or special treatment.

ODD is over diagnosed, so is ADHD. Misusing terms like that does a real disservice to those who truly do deal with them and need help.

A lot of the problems we now see with children who are "difficult" could be better managed by eliminating crap from their diet and making sure they get enough exercise. Sugar doesn't make kids hyper, but a lot of the dyes etc. can cause a problem. BTDT long before it was the cool thing to say. A helpful doctor showed me how to do an elimination diet 20 years ago before it was all the rage.

So is Narcissistic Personalty Disorder. Suddenly everyone's parents and/or in-law is textbook for this. Maybe they were just an a--hole.

Anonymous wrote:"Spirited child" tells people you haven't figured out how to manage your kid yet. This is not a diagnosis of any kind and doesn't give you the right to expect an IEP or special treatment.

ODD is over diagnosed, so is ADHD. Misusing terms like that does a real disservice to those who truly do deal with them and need help.

A lot of the problems we now see with children who are "difficult" could be better managed by eliminating crap from their diet and making sure they get enough exercise. Sugar doesn't make kids hyper, but a lot of the dyes etc. can cause a problem. BTDT long before it was the cool thing to say. A helpful doctor showed me how to do an elimination diet 20 years ago before it was all the rage.

+1 And a stubborn child doesn't mean "oppositional defiance disorder". A friend noticed the same thing about cutting out dyes, especially red dyes from her kid's diet. World of difference in hyperactivity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people who don't believe in God or a life after death are among the saddest people I know. I don't get what they have to live for.

Life. Their family. Their friends. Their passions. Life is an amazing gift and if you're frittering it away and just following your religious rules to get back to Jesus --- you're in for a rude shock on the other side.

And when you die - you just die. That's it -- so you better make the most of the time you have.

By hanging out on DCUM.

"Spirited child" tells people you haven't figured out how to manage your kid yet. This is not a diagnosis of any kind and doesn't give you the right to expect an IEP or special treatment.

ODD is over diagnosed, so is ADHD. Misusing terms like that does a real disservice to those who truly do deal with them and need help.

A lot of the problems we now see with children who are "difficult" could be better managed by eliminating crap from their diet and making sure they get enough exercise. Sugar doesn't make kids hyper, but a lot of the dyes etc. can cause a problem. BTDT long before it was the cool thing to say. A helpful doctor showed me how to do an elimination diet 20 years ago before it was all the rage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish American society didn't put athletes and those in the entertainment industry on pedestals.

Oh, I completely agree. And don't think they deserve to make the sickening amounts of money they make. Our priorities are completely out of whack.

And on the other end of the spectrum, I think college athlete who pull in major money for universities should be able to make some sort of profit.

Fuck no. The athlete worship in this country is insane. WHO CARES if you can throw a ball, you're not saving lives.

NFL should not be a tax-exempt organization. We should cap players' salaries.

Aside from a free ride and some campus celebrity, unless a player makes it to the pros, college football players at big name schools are used and spit out by the schools. Winning teams make millions of dollars each season for schools without having to pay players.

Aside from a free ride? A free ride has significant monetary value, and I think that's enough as "payment" for college football players. Most of the best players choose schools out of state -- even state schools out of state can be 50k with room and board, food etc. 50k over 4 years is 200k. At D1 schools esp the ones that are football obsessed, players get a lot of free "stuff." I know Penn State the best and know a few guys on that team. They get a ton of free clothing, and I'm not suggesting just a few PSU football sweatshirts. Everything from multiple pairs of sneakers to backpacks to athletic gear to winter coats are provided to them; I'm sure the NCAA has a cap but conservatively I'd say it can't be less than 2k of stuff per year. You could practically move your son into the dorms with one pair of clothing on his back, and the rest would be taken care of. This year the school got all of the football players (and all athletes) i-pads. When they made a bowl game this year, they got a swag bag consisting of the usual sweatshirts/hats etc. but also an apple TV, Bluetooth speakers, and gift cards in addition to a week in NYC; sure they practiced during the week, but they also got to see shows, do touristy things and eat at nice restaurants -- all of which costs money; so there's another 1-2k per player. The university (or maybe the NCAA) has now also decided to provide additional food beyond just providing a meal plan, so there's an endless supply of snacks and drinks available to athletes in their athletic facilities -- so there's another few hundred dollars/month that students don't have to spend on snacks and meal supplements for after practice. While all these "extras" seem small, they add up to about 5k/yr combined -- 20k over 4 years.

I'd say 220k over 4 years is plenty of payment to a football player, even if the program is making millions. If that's not enough for their "talent," they're not compelled to play college ball, they can take their talent straight to the NFL draft if anyone will have them. And remember not every player is a starter that's generating ticket sales; I could see those guys feeling like they deserve more but half the team or more is on the practice squad and they get the same benefits.

They don't get to choose their majors. The athletic department chooses it for them based on their training and travel schedule. As you can imagine, the athletes and not just football players, but baseball, tennis, basketball, soccer are pushed into less demanding majors like sports management opposed to physical therapy. So, is it really a free-ride?

And to add, why anyone would want Hillary to run our country is an idiot. Her husband clearly cheated on her, showed no remorse, and she stuck with him. She has no backbone and is a political puppet.

If she would have left him immediately, I would feel she has the backbone we need in a leader.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michele Obama can't hold a candle to her First Lady predecessors.

What? I think she's one of the best we've had. Many of the others were way too dull.

I'm not an Obama fan at all. But I agree, Michele is a great First Lady compared to some of the past ones.

She is energetic, she is out there, and she doesn't seem stuffy. The past ones were too stuffy and seemed above everyone....almost snooty.

I agree. I also don't love Obama, but I find little to dislike about Michelle. She's energetic, successful in her own right, a good role model - what's not to like, original anti-MO poster?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michele Obama can't hold a candle to her First Lady predecessors.

What? I think she's one of the best we've had. Many of the others were way too dull.

I'm not an Obama fan at all. But I agree, Michele is a great First Lady compared to some of the past ones.

She is energetic, she is out there, and she doesn't seem stuffy. The past ones were too stuffy and seemed above everyone....almost snooty.

Anonymous wrote:I think people who don't believe in God or a life after death are among the saddest people I know. I don't get what they have to live for.

Life. Their family. Their friends. Their passions. Life is an amazing gift and if you're frittering it away and just following your religious rules to get back to Jesus --- you're in for a rude shock on the other side.

And when you die - you just die. That's it -- so you better make the most of the time you have.

Anonymous wrote:Viewing pornography is the same as having an affair.

Then watching a McDonalds commercial means you eat fast food.