AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
NIL act passed - NCAA allows athletes to monetise their name, image, likeness
- Thread starter Creebuzz
- Start date
There are so many ways this can evolve. Unfortunately, I see very few paths that lead to CU being a national player again. Where our ceiling was 11 wins and a nice bowl game ten years ago, I think it’s more like 8 games and a minor bowl from here on out. And reaching that ceiling is going to take a lot of effort that this school isn’t willing to put forth. Get used to 35,000 in the stands and playing on the P12 network at weird times.
FTR, I'm good with the weird times. I used to object to D1 schools playing football on Friday nights ("stop f ucking w/ high school ball!"), but I'm now beyond caring. Give me CU games to attend that kick off at 7PM Friday, 10AM Saturday or hell, 10PM Saturday. Please, please please give us one or two Thursday night games. Hell, Tuesday or Wednesday nights would be fine w/ me. I'll make it to more of them if the timing isn't such that it means dedicating an entire weekend day to attending a game.
Remember the time Augusta dropped all advertising from the Masters because they weren’t going to be told who they allow in their club?
SEC country has plenty of money
NCAA Roles for Boosters
“Only institutional staff members are permitted to recruit prospective student-athletes. Generally, NCAA rules prohibit anyone else from contacting (calling, writing or in-person contact) prospects or the prospect’s relatives or guardian for recruiting purposes.”
“Boosters are not precluded from continuing established friendships with families who have prospective student-athletes. However, boosters may not encourage a prospect’s participation in university athletics or provide benefits to prospects that were not previously provided.”
Tell me these rules are not being violated egregiously.
“Only institutional staff members are permitted to recruit prospective student-athletes. Generally, NCAA rules prohibit anyone else from contacting (calling, writing or in-person contact) prospects or the prospect’s relatives or guardian for recruiting purposes.”
“Boosters are not precluded from continuing established friendships with families who have prospective student-athletes. However, boosters may not encourage a prospect’s participation in university athletics or provide benefits to prospects that were not previously provided.”
Tell me these rules are not being violated egregiously.
Regulating the market you say, Nick and Kirby?
I think they want to avoid that the costs spiral out of control and think that money can be better spent elsewhere. To a degree I think this is the schools and players competing for the size of their share of the cake.
That’s like asking Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates about the fairness of income tax laws.
Nothing is stopping him from paying more than he needs to. What a disingenuous thing to say.
What a disingenuous thing to say.
I don't see it as disingenuous in context of the preceding "we can have most of that additional money come from those who are better off". I see the "I need to" part as explicitly acknowledging that he would be impacted by the changes he's advocating for. I take it as actually adding frankness to his position.
that being said, judging sincerity is a fairly subjective process
I guess I’d feel better about it if he actually volunteered to pay an extra 5% while making a statement like that. It’s easy to say “people like me should pay more”, and then sit back and wait for it to happen. It comes across as hypocritical to me. If he believes he should pay more, then by all means, pay more.
I see it more like the AL manager who thinks the DH should be abolished, but isn't going to let his pitchers bat until everyone else does the same. Or the anti-nuke politician who wants a treaty between the US and the ROW nuclear powers but doesn't favor unilateral disarmament.
If Gates would suffer in some way or put himself at some kind of disadvantage as the result of his paying additional taxes, I could see that point of view. But he wouldn’t. So I don’t.
The Gates Foundation is a serious charitable endeavor with significant resources from Bill. He also joined that group that pledged to give away more than 90% of their wealth before they die.
You are barking up the wrong tree.
That’s fine. It’s also irrespective of what he pays in taxes, which is the subject at hand. If he wants to pay more taxes, he should pay more taxes. Nobody is stopping him.
This is an idiotic statement. I hope you realize that.
What’s so idiotic about it? He’s free to do whatever he wants to with his money. He can give it to charity. He can pay taxes with it. He can use it to wallpaper his house for all I care. It’s HIS money. What’s idiotic is the notion that because somebody gives away a lot of money he somehow is not allowed to pay more in taxes than he is required to.
honestly, what is stopping him from paying more in taxes? If nothing is stopping him from paying more, and he says he should pay more, why isn’t he?
Because you ****ing clown, the IRS would just give it back to him. They aren't in the business of keeping money that they aren't allowed to keep by law. This isn't ****ing rocket science, and the IRS isn't running a god damn charity.
Now, go sit in the corner for a while and think about the dumbassery that you have allowed to be displayed on my monitor. And make me a sandwich.
No. The IRS wouldn’t if he specifically designated the additional funds to be paid.
The idiocy here is coming from the folks who somehow think Bill Gates isn’t allowed to spend his money however he sees fit.
It’s idiotic because the point Bill Gates was making is that our current tax structure should be altered so that those who make tens of millions of dollars per year should be required to pay more than they currently do. Furthermore, that loopholes that allow these super wealthy individuals to skirt the current system should be closed.
So, tell me again how Bill Gates overpaying his taxes accomplishes any of those ends?
It doesn’t. But if he really wanted to make that point and not be hypocritical about it, he’d pay more. Those loopholes you refer to are ones I’m sure he takes full advantage of. Which was my point all along. He’s being hypocritical.
Nooooooo, he's not. He's advocating for a change in the tax laws. You can do that without paying more in taxes now. If he avoided paying the taxes after the laws were changed, that would be hypocritical.
Me: I think our neighborhood should have basketball courts.
Neighbor: Nothing is stopping you from paying for new basketball courts for the neighborhood.
Me: I don't want to pay for the courts on my own.
Neighbor: What a disingenuous thing to say, you hypocrite.
Neighbor: Nothing is stopping you from paying for new basketball courts for the neighborhood.
Me: I don't want to pay for the courts on my own.
Neighbor: What a disingenuous thing to say, you hypocrite.
So in NotSure’s defense, NotSure is just another idiot? UBL?