Comments by 81volguy

  • Older Comments
  • Page 1 of 1
  • Newer Comments
Written on John Adams: UT's next move needs to be as good as Cuonzo Martin's was :

in response to oldster:

Easy for you to say. It is not your checkbook.

Right but it's just a matter of investing in the future. Which I'm sure is a foreign concept to you, since by your moniker I assume you don't have much of a future.

Written on John Adams: UT's next move needs to be as good as Cuonzo Martin's was :

Agreed. Open up the checkbook and go get Marshall.

Written on John Adams: Team 118 should incur fewer mismatches:

I have a strange feeling about that Oklahoma game. Maybe not a wing, but a close game. It's going to come down to the wire.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

What Jarnell is saying is, and what some are too obtuse to hear it, is, "I could stay in college if you'd give me a decent wage. I make money for the university and the NCAA and yes, I get a scholarship. But I don't have any money. But I have to go pro now because of the system. Sorry Tennessee and you fans." And the fans are so dumb they say, "Well, if you didn't like the contract why did you sign it? You should have done something else!" I mean literally that's what some have said. But if you just give Jarnell a halfway decent salary on top of his scholarship so he can have some money to spend, then he might stay in school. I don't see why that's controversial to the free marketeers. It seems like they would want to pay for things that generate wealth. That helps even the wealthy! And it might improve Jarnell's life as well, as well as those who watch him play.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to oldster:

The reason that the CEOs, managers, etc. make more money than the workers, is because their skills are exceptional and in demand. They sacrificed to get the education that most of the workers did not. The value of a good CEO can be seen by the many business turn arounds that have accompanied changes in leadership.

In college football, look at the difference that occurred at Alabama when they ditched Shula in favor of Saban. Think that business has gotten its money's worth? Think any one player, or even a group of them is worth as much as Saban?

College athletes are getting benefits from their skills and efforts on behalf of the college - whether they are from poor backgrounds or not. They are being given the skills necessary to lead a productive and profitable life - whether in sports or not. The total value of what they are being given is totally up to them.

BTW: The middle class helped make America great. However, without the Vanderbilts, the Gettys, the J.P.Morgans, the Edisons, the robber barons, the railroad tycoons, etc. etc., the middle class would not have mattered because they would have had no jobs. I should say, WE, as I am a member of that class. The difference is, I appreciate those geniuses, those ambitious, those rich that provided me with the opportunity to make a living.

OK now we're getting deep into economics. I do not disagree that the Gettys, Vanderbilts, etc., should be wealthy. I do disagree that a CEO should make 500 times what an average worker makes. During the era you're speaking of, it was more like 50-1 or 100-1. Now it's such as vast difference as to create huge disparities in opportunities, and yes, political clout and voice. Now a single billionaire, conservative or Democrat, has 500 times more power than the average voter. I can live with him/her having 50 times more power, because, as you say, that's the way the world works. But it's way out of whack now. And the nation is poorer for it -- and I mean that literally. The more wealth that is at the top, the less there is for everyone else. Trickle down is clearly a fraud. Sports is a microcosm of what we're talking about.... but it's way more just than the rest of society, on a professional level. Yes the owners of the teams and the coaches, make millions, but so do the players, who are actually what the fans want to see. At the professional level, where there are the strongest unions, everyone is paid more equitably, and everyone is happy. Or at least, most of the time they are. So let's make the rest of the country like the NBA, NFL and MLB.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to oldster:

Because they signed a contract saying that they would? If they did not or do not like the contract, I can think of lots of guys who would. Granted the level of skill of the athletic contests might not be as good, but, heck, I enjoy watching good high school, or even 7 years olds play as much as I enjoy the pros (and their egos are not nearly so disgusting).

Right so I'm saying change the contract. You're saying, don't change the contract. I guess we can't agree on that. But your argument also makes my point. Watch another sport if you don't like it. See if anyone cares. But apparently you care, or most people care, what the real athletes do. Not 7-year-olds, dude. You make the classic mistake of thinking just because you think something, others must think the same way. Ummm, no, actually we would rather watch great sports and have the athletes compensated in a fair manner, both during their collegiate careers and later. You keep saying, "Oh, they signed a contract." OK. Change the contract rules! That is what I'm advocating and what Stokes is advocating. If you disagree with that, fine, but your argument is about the terms of the contract, not the appropriateness of the the NCAA rules. OK nice talking to you. Peace.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to oldster:

If tats are in and cell phones have reached the point of being a necessity, I would rather not. The Communists may now be right - we are a decadent society.

LOL good one!

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to tntuba#225866:

That is the way it works in the real world. The folks doing the labor make significantly less than the executive leadership and the ownership of the business. It's just the way the world operates. The people checking you out at WalMart make $10 an hour. Michale Duke, the CEO of WalMart made $23.15 Million last year. Just like the fine folks that are working hard at WalMart...if the players don't think they are being appropriately compensated for their work....they can quit and do something else.

What are you talking about? In college sports, the people who are the leaders, the moneymakers, ARE the players; it's not the university -- is that what you think? Think about it.... this is true in professional sports as well. The NBA, MLB, NFL, are all governed by labor contracts that guarantee big salaries to the actual people who drive revenue. Your example is infantile. We all know the CEO of Wal Mart makes millions while the people at the cashier stations make $7.50 an hour. Somehow you think that justifies the collegiate athletic system? I suppose you think it's cool that that top 5 percent controls 90 percent of the wealth. "Oh, that's just how the world works." Perhaps. But that's not what made America great -- it was the middle class. And that's being squeezed. Same with college athletes. Most of these kids are from poor backgrounds. You say, "Oh, if they don't like it, they should do something else." What? Don't you think they should benefit from their talents according to the marketplace instead of being indentured by a socialistic system? You say, I say, "Pay them what they are worth, and if YOU don't like it, watch another sport." Peace.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to rockypop:

What is the cutoff point for a student athlete's expenses? They have cell phones; rent (which I don't understand); food - whenever they want it, which is always; car insurance; tats; video games; entertainment; etc., etc., etc. Every student has these expenses, and more, and they don't get any scholarship money at all.

I get the jersey sales. But, there are only a handful of kids whose jerseys are big sellers, and they will get theirs at the next level - which by the way, universities are basically subsidizing them for until they are ready.

The real issue with this pretty much mirrors US economic circumstances for the masses. That is the upper 10% control the wealth, just like the upper 10% of student athletes actually have a legitimate claim of deserving payments for jersey sales. What about the other 90% who make it possible for the stars to shine? What are they worth? And, if you decide to pay one player, the end result will eventually be that you'll have to pay all of them - even the women.

It's a mess.

What about the other 90% who make it possible for the stars to shine? What are they worth?

Individually, they aren't worth anything. Collectively, they are worth something. If they organized and boycotted maybe they could make a statement. But Stokes is worth something individually. Otherwise you wouldn't care. Your arguments are hollow -- "they are getting paid for their education, etc., etc." So? They are also making millions for the NCAA and the the universities. Why shouldn't they be paid for that?

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to oldster:

Cell phones are NOT a necessity. You just think they are because you have always had one and could not imagine living without one. It is NOT necessary to stay in touch with everyone you know 24/7. Leave a message.

Computers are now an integral part of an education now. Agreed, but they are needed to do research and type up and save homework and assignments.

Tats are expensive enough that the money used to buy them could be used to pay for several of the meals that are, for some reason - evidently - necessary for some athletes over and above their food allowance.

These athletes can afford to eat. To say otherwise is pure baloney.

Dude, try to live in the current century.

Written on Jarnelll Stokes says college athletes need more money:

in response to oldster:

How much food could he buy for the cost of the tats? How much could he get for the amount he pays for a cell phone?

I had no tats, no phone - at all, shared a room in a boarding house with another guy, and a toilet and shower with 12 others, and worked as many hours to earn the money for my tuition, books, rent, food, clothes and recreation as athletes do working to earn their scholarships. They get free tuition, free books, tutors, food allowances, a free dorm room, or housing allowance. Sorry, I do not pity them. There are more people like me than like them.

Also, how does one determine who gets what money? Do the Stokes of the world get the same amount as the Lopezes or Cheivoses? If not, and the stars get more, will that not lead to say point guards like Darius Thompson keeping the ball away from the stars and shooting in order to pump up his worth and paycheck?

Nope, if you do not like what the college is offering, go to Europe and learn your craft there. I will not miss you.

Phones are mandatory. I grew up without computers but they are mandatory now. Times change. As for the tattoos, they aren't that expensive. He's right, it's a crime for these athletes to not have a living wage. The university and other companies make millions off them and they can't even buy dinner. It's ridiculous.

Written on Dave Serrano says Vols reached 'defining moment' with series victory over Vanderbilt:

in response to RoadTrip:

This is how it's done folks. You are watching a true professional at work. Thanks for believing in and coming back to Rocky Top, CDS. The guys are starting to believe in themselves like Vol teams should.

Pretty sure you're a coach of the team, not a fan. Because this team has performed WAY below the way it should. Just watch the rest of the season, and we'll see who's right.

Written on Tennessee State transfer M.J. Rhett eyes Vols, would like to play with Jarnell Stokes:

Come on, young man. You look like a great player and a great person. And, you should come regardless of Mr. Stokes' decision. We would love to have you at Tennessee.

Written on UT, Cuonzo Martin renew commitment to one another; coach's revised contract is in the works:

in response to 81volguy:

The Vols have a good chance to be a good team next year with Richardson, Reese, Moore and incoming Austin, Cofer, Cornish and Turman. Plus if Stokes stays we'll be a different, more athletic team. Plus the Vols have sharpshooting commit for 2015, Justice, from Kentucky. This could be interesting.

Forgot to mention Hubbs. Don't sell this coach short. He's beaten KY and Fla his share already. And he gave Kentucky one of the worst beat-downs in Wildcat history. This year he didn't beat those teams, but it was close. Give it time.

Written on UT, Cuonzo Martin renew commitment to one another; coach's revised contract is in the works:

The Vols have a good chance to be a good team next year with Richardson, Reese, Moore and incoming Austin, Cofer, Cornish and Turman. Plus if Stokes stays we'll be a different, more athletic team. Plus the Vols have sharpshooting commit for 2015, Justice, from Kentucky. This could be interesting.

Written on Mike Strange: The money ball is in Martin's court now:

in response to terry#1416762:

Let him go, and take Hart with him. But, for a fluke, generational upset by Mercer, and we are eliminated by Duke.

We were lucky to get in the pick 4 process, we will be even luckier to be w/n 10 of michigan.

When Stokes and Maymon (pearl recruit) are gone we are going to get savaged in the SEC. We will lose McRae, Maymon, and Stokes from this team, and rumor has it one highly recruited player from last year.

I hope we win, but the realist tells me Sunday was the Apex of the MarNIT years. Rough sledding ahead, for a team that has looked lost all year long despite a lot of talent.

Cuonzo will get the call, don't match and let him accept the call, his stock will be at an all time high, let him do what is best for him in the long run.

Gee it seems like it might be a good idea to see how the season goes. Typical clueless fan. Martin got Stokes and Hubbs, both five-stars. He'll get more. But if he reads comments like yours, I wouldn't blame him to get the heck away from Tennessee. Let the man do his job and this team could go all the way. By the way, we would've stomped Duke just like we did Mercer.

Written on Obama predicts UConn in his women's NCAA bracket :

in response to snowpeapod#263184:

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't this article about sports on a sports related website? Based on the main character in the article it couldn't help but have a certain political overtone. So lets keep it strictly about sports. I believe odds is a term usually related to sports so what are the odds that most people agree with me? Right now it appears to be two for and one against.

Make it 2-2. I'm sure you were equally outraged when the "W" was on vacation when 3,000 people were killed during 9/11. Grow up and be consistent.

Written on Don't think First Four game counts as NCAA tournament? The Vols say you're wrong.:

in response to Rookie2:

The sad part is these kids don't feel like they have the support of their own fan base and that's a shame. Why would anyone want to come and play at this University when so many in the fan base think is more important to push an agenda of getting rid of a coach than supporting their team. In that sort of toxic environment they are doomed to fail.

Embarrassed Vol fan.

Well your point is taken and I've never called for getting rid of Martin. But it's quite amazing that anyone would be satisfied with where this team is, and where they could have been. I think the criticism is quite fair and not embarrassing. This team has underperformed. I think anyone would agree with that. But the season isn't over. We'll see.

Written on Don't think First Four game counts as NCAA tournament? The Vols say you're wrong.:

in response to GerryOP:

Can we win the national championship? Yes? Then we're in the tourney. And only three teams in the SEC can say that. UT is one of them.

For you guys who are never happy with our Vols, go back to the article and read Jordy Mac's statement. Never good enough for our fans...

I was about to post how clueless McCrae is when I saw your post OF COURSE the fans are saying it's not good enough for this team! Our power rankings are way up there, because we can whip the heck out of some excellent teams, then lose to the lowest of the low the next game. No, getting to the play-in IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. And the fact that McCrae is defensive about that elemental fact means we are likely doomed.

Written on John Adams: Lowly Auburn still poses a threat to Vols:

Absolutely right. And if you hate John Adams because of this column, you can't stand the truth. In fact that's why most vol fans hate him... can't stand the truth.

Written on Azzanni excited about UT Vols receivers this year:

in response to murrayvol:

So am I. Now if we can just get the ball to them somehow.

Don't count out Worley. His injury really cost us last year. He'll be stronger and faster this year.

Written on John Adams: Bruce Pearl still could be UT's best option:

in response to atnvol#283282:

You really just can't help yourself can you John? Were you frequently bullied as a child?

Seriously, what is wrong with you? You post this utterly nonsensical personal attack based on... what? Why? Get a life and go away.

Written on John Adams: A new year will bring old streaks for Vols:

in response to LRader156:

Sorry orange kool-aid drinkers, but this is the time of year to reflect back in order to make plans for the future. Bash Adams all you want, but I liked looking back at all the streaks that our program must overcome. There is a lot of work to do. Our program is at a place that we have not been in a century. Not sure why you types just want water carriers in the media regarding the football program. It ain't Adams fault that we stink.

Agreed.

Written on Tennessee football's 12 months of change, transition: Behind the scenes in Butch Jones' first year:

Nicely done story, evan. I challenge all the critics of this site, and yes, the John Adams haters, to find this kind of content anywhere else. A mature perspective by a reporter who's covered the team all year and who can provide perspective. And John Adams is not supposed to be a cheerleader for your team. This is good journalism and it will be a crime if it dies because what will replace it might very well be the commenters on this board. Merry Christmas to all, and I mean that genuinely.

Written on John Adams: Recruiting class could bolster UT's possible lack of star power next season:

in response to Caspian:

Not nuts. Just don't agree with Adams opinion. By your definition, are you and Adams nuts, too? Maybe we're all nuts. Maybe football is just a game. Maybe it doesn't really matter.

It's fine to disagree in a reasonable manner, as you did here. But some just go crazy when John Adams tells the truth. It is disproporationate to the content of his columns, usually.

Written on John Adams: Recruiting class could bolster UT's possible lack of star power next season:

It's amazing how thin-skinned these Vol fans are. Adams writes a reasonable, truthful column. They go nuts. One wonders how they respond to real-world problems and political discourse. I think I know.

Written on Tennessee target Josh Malone keeping his cool during recruitment :

in response to blazevol:

So I pay $300 a year to get the paper. Why should I pay more?

Because GVX is independent of the paper

Written on Tennessee target Josh Malone keeping his cool during recruitment :

in response to TNlogfire:

Nice article, Jesse...thanks for giving us some "free" info...pretty sick of these sites (247) begging for your money when the best they have to offer is that blowhard Rucker, who MAY know more about football than my little niece....but I doubt it.

It's strange that you think things that you value should be free. If you think they don't have value then don't complain about them costing something. Your post makes no sense whatsoever. Reporting isn't free. If you think it should be, go ahead and report for free and post it on a blog. What's stopping you?

  • Older Comments
  • Page 1 of 1
  • Newer Comments

Features