This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

• Please do not copy entire articles into your post; rather, provide links to them.. We are now links-only for ALL Internet publications. If only a small portion of the article pertains to your post, Fair Use allows you to copy those one or two paragraphs, provided you cite the author's name and the publication for which he writes. Otherwise, put a link in the HTTP Link box.
• Even if you're copying a reference to an article, provide a link to the page from which the article came. We're trying to cut down on duplicate topics, and the posting process will check the link to your article to see if it's already being discussed on this board. At the very least, you'll save yourself some grief on the boards.
• If your first reaction after reading the article you're going to share is the author is uninformed / stupid / a jerk / all of the above, it's not worth sharing with anyone. Not every article needs to be discussed. The more the hair-pulling articles are discussed (e.g. ESPN Page 2), the more the authors will write hair-pulling articles.

Post being replied to

That's a big part of it, though, right? by StetsonDan

The conclusion is that college athletics is a treasured national institution subject to intense pressures from public opinion and the courts so it must be strengthened and preserved by Congressional regulation along with assistance from professional sports.

As nohow mentioned above, they mention the widespread belief that college athletics is simply a lucrative business disguised as a branch of educational institutions, but don't really say anything to disprove it.

It's especially ripe coming from Jack Swarbrick given his net worth is almost solely built on the labor of amateur athletes (and he has set up his kids in adjacent careers which profit off of ND's place in the current "treasured national institution").

I also think Rev. Jenkins is not a good spokesman given given how he walked back his initial response to the improper academic benefits scandal under Kelly. That is, why should the NCAA care what he says when he doesn't care what they say?

For all the talk about landscape monitoring from our director of athletics who has been in the amateur athletics industry for thirty plus years, I don't see a hint of leadership. Where was he in pushing for action on NIL prior to 2021? He's as feckless as the institution he wishes he could be running (the NCAA).

At this point, my thought is to make the players employees if for no other reason to prevent the Jacks of the world from continuing to profit off the backs of unpaid labor when his pointless statements and continual efforts to cover his own ass represent the worst of my profession (and the profession of a plurality of posters here).