The school shouldn't owe them anything i either case and it doesn't mean the school isn't holding up to their end of the bargain. Athletic scholarships are given to athletes that are on the team and participating in team events.
How to fix star players sitting out bowls
- Thread starter HI Cock
- Start date
If someone leaves their job in December, should they still be collecting paychecks in February?
My advice to Deebo and any other rookie is to hold off on any significant donation to the university until after he has signed his 2nd contract and is thus sure his NFL career will be longer than the average. If he only plays three years in his chosen profession, he won't make enough to live luxuriously the rest of his life.
If he only plays three years, he won't make enough to live period for the rest of his life.
The point is that in the vast majority of cases, when someone stops providing services, they stop receiving benefits.
Sure, contracts can vary, but typically people don't continue getting paid when they leave a place of employment.
What you are describing is generally "at-will" employment. Big difference between "at-will" and contract, especially from a legal perspective.
I'm not interested in discussing the law with you. I'm guessing you're an attorney. Let's just focus on my quote and forget about Deebo. I was also following up on a basketball comment that he made earlier.
Would you or would you not agree that in the vast majority of situations, when person A stops providing services or goods to person B, person B stops providing compensation or other benefits to person A?
I understand that Deebo has a contract and that this is a little different.
Yes, in the majority of situations that is probably true. But in a situation like this, there are plenty of good non-legal reasons not to do so....most have been covered in prior posts.
Leaves no. And I don’t think the kids that leave care.
Employees that are forced out are in many cases given a severance package. You’d be amazed how many times it has happened.
Do you really think all the men’s basketball players that have transferred over the past 5 years were all just disloyal to the USC?
I’m a Gamecock but take off the garnet glasses for a minute. Every school encourages/forces kids to transfer every year.
I don't necessarily disagree with a lot of the non-legal reasons stated here. I just don't agree with that particular posters reasons. The school doesn't want bad publicity and I get that.
I don’t always see eye to eye with you @rogue cock but this is one where we agree!
The kids go through enough and very few times do they have any leverage.
The one time an athlete gains the slightest bit of an advantage and people want to come down on the kid despite the many ways that the NCAA & it’s schools do things that hurt the student athlete.
Won't be a big money maker for much longer if the trend is for teams who get invited to lesser bowls to not make winning the game a priority (evidenced by allowing stars worried about their NFL draft position to skip out). Fans won't be interested in continuing to tune in or travel to games where the players that do show up don't really want to be there. I support the idea of expanding the playoffs for that reason.
Yes they are and kids are supposed to “know” that but just as you “expect”players to be coming back and playing every game the athletes “expect” that school and coach to be loyal to them for those four years, one year at a time.
Loyalty is a two way street and you’d be amazed how many times that loyalty ends up screwing a kid. It happens to them a lot more than it happens to the university I guarantee you that.
This is no knock on USC. It happens to kids at every school across this country.
I expect that for a kid to receive a full year scholarship that he should play for one full year. That's all I really expect. I don't expect loyalty from either side.
Loyalty is nice and I would prefer it from both sides, but I don't expect it.
If I were Deebo, I might do the same thing. But I don't think its unreasonable to ask him to forego at least a part of his scholarship. For PR reasons, I don't think it would be a good idea for USC to do that. But a rule change that affected all schools wouldn't bother me, either.
I get what you are saying but where would that end? Kids get hurt? Kids decide to transfer? Pay the school back.
It’s clearly a loophole and 10 years ago a non issue. My guess is the ncaa will look to address it as it becomes more and more common
That IS very true. Also the same can be said for star players in the NBA who sit out the last few regular season games after the playoff picture is already set.
I'm not sure that the NCAA can do anything that can affect this. I can't think of any rule change they could impose that would be effective. The NFL could if they wanted to.
Who's talking about Deebo but you? The subject is about any player leaving early. Any student on a football ride or an academic scholarship student can leave but when they do don't they surrender any rights to housing etc.? Of course they do and the school owes them nothing, they can give back to their school as much as they want in life. Players dismissed from the school for whatever reasons lose any rights they have so why not the player who bails? Does an employee who left his job have the same rights and prevs as the current employees... no the don't and shouldn't have. Do coaches who quit the team for any reason still hang around? No, I don't wonder why they leave, I know why they leave, they are doing what they think is right for them but if you decide to leave the team then leave the dooms too that would give them something to think about. Ya can't have your cake and eat it too is my point.
I have my doubts as well. I’m sure coaches will get together and talk about it.
Fact is it’s hard to sell boosters and fans on buying tickets when the best players decide in advance not to play. It’s not cheap to attend a bowl game....well the Belk Bowl isn’t bad but usually Charlotte isn’t the destination.
The only thing that the NCAA could do is pass a rule that states if you are on scholarship, you must play in every game that the coaching staff wants you to....or something similar. BUT you can't do that....you can't "force" someone to work...that is called involuntary servitude and there are laws against it.
The NFL could use a disincentive to those who refuse to play.....affecting their draft status, or their initial contract, etc. But that would not be in their best interest, so I doubt that ever happens.
Yeah, I got your point after I reread it. I initially thought you were responding to his comment about transfers and injured players.
So you’re not talking about Deebo? You’re talking about players leaving and the latest to leave this program is Deebo. Did this topic come up before Deebo? You’re talking about Deebo. Just own it.
Yes students that leave surrender their housing rights. Do you think these guys headed to the NFL combine are hanging around the university eating dorm food? You guys are painting a picture that once these guys leave, they are still receiving benefits from the university. In most cases they are not. If they are, it’s becuase the university chooses to.
You might be surprised that in many cases NCAA basketball players go home with teammates during Christmas break or cram into a hotel room because those players have to vacate their campus dorm when the regular students leave. Heck it used to be a violation for a player to accept money to go home for a FUNERAL of a PARENT.
If you want to abandon kids for choosing to go pro, don’t be surprised when kids of that caliber don’t choose to attend USC. You’d think our fans would be happy for the kid with a chance to make it big and represent our university. Instead we have a lot of fans choosing to be salty acting like a dumped prom date.
You think kids want to come here and be treated like a fired employee on the way out for expressing their interest to get PAID to do the same thing they have done their whole life for free?
I don't think I want to slog into this. The thing is done. College football, already altered for some years by early exits, has just further gone away from the game I knew when I first became interested. It will never go back, but my level of interest won't be what it was, either.
From a legal perspective, why would it be considered forced work if all they're doing is saying that the kid won't get the scholarship until they have completed the season?
Is it because they would be taking a scholarship back as opposed to not providing one for completed work? Is it just timing?
Oh, you can take their scholarship away. Most may not care, if they don't care about the degree. Some may. If one sued however, doubt it's an issue that the school could win on....in that instance the court would look to see if the player substantially complied with the agreement. Substantial compliance does not require the formal requirement to be met to enforce the contract...which is what the school would be arguing. It would be an ugly situation regardless.
And meanwhile expect the recruiting of said school to take a hit.....
Yep....a huge one. Even if the school could win the case, they'd lose.
You're making as much sense as screen doors on a submarine and wasting my time. Stick to your guns on what you think but I wouldn't want you running my business I'd have to provide safe zones.
I guess I get the substantial compliance argument if you're looking at the fact that a player played in 12 of the 13 games.
I don't care much about most of these bowl games, but think about this if say a kid wanted to sit out in a conference championship game. My argument as a coach would be that our goal was to win the conference championship, and the kid didn't even play in the game. We gave this kid a scholarship to help us win the SEC championship. The goal wasn't to win all of the games that got the team to the championship game. The goal was to win the championship game, and this kid didn't substantially comply with our stated goals. I suppose you could use the same type of argument with these bowl games. I don't know anything about the law though so who knows.
Every different fact affects the argument...and you never know what a jury will do.
“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell” - Carl Sandburg
Last edited:
Simplest solution would be for the fans learn to care less about bowls, all will be good.
thats what I was trying to get at in an earlier post. If I had to guess, he played in the Akron game because he felt obligated to finish the regularly scheduled season. It's what he commented to. Evidently there is no such commitment made for a bonus game that is seen as a reward for a successful season. The way I see it is we either extend the post season into the regular season with a playoff expansion, or fans stop taking bowl games as serious as they have in the past. Since the only thing I can do about it is the latter, I'm gonna do that.
Exactly . Well if you don’t want this problem then we can recruit like Wake Forest and Vandy and we will never have this issue again . If you wanna win you gotta have Elite players . Elite players are in it for one reason .... Get drafted and get paid . All the rah rah do it for the love of your school or the fans or your teammates died twenty years ago . It’s a BUSINESS . The university makes Millions off these kids and in return the kids get exposure to audition for a job that will pay them like Kings . I want everybody to read this and comment .... IF DEEBO SUFFERED A CAREER ENDING INJURY IN THE BELK BOWL WOULD YOU AS A FAN WRITE HIM A PERSONAL CHECK FOR 5 MILLION DOLLARS OR MORE ??? IS USC GONNA DO THE SAME ??? HEEELLLL NO !!!!! Easy for us to disapprove when we have nothing on the line but the score of a football game than nobody that doesn’t live in SC or Virginia cares about .
This has already happened, with players skipping their senior year. The players are suppose to be in college for...college (education), but it's essentially just the established venue for amateur athletes.
I would be sad if this happened, but it wouldn't change my world, but it would alter his entire future. Well made point which I don't understand why people can't comprehend this.
Personally I don't have a problem with sitting out of a game where there's a great downside risk for a meaningless game. Just as going to a bowl game is a reward for your season, not going to the bowl game should be a reward for those few players who have a chance to play in the league as a thank you for four great years.
