Mr. Tibbs
- southeast DuPage
they will white out Keady Court & put Painter Place in
Coaching Carousel (Basketball)
sbillini
- st petersburg, fl
I get the sense it’s a moot question. The first question is do “we” want him back (ie does BB want him back). i get the sense that’s a hard “no”
Is this a joke?
This is EXACTLY what I thought. He’s probably known for a while. This improves the chances of his guy keeping the job after a year long audition.
It's only funny if you really feel bad for someone making 4+ million a year to have to do their job.
There are millions of people who would happily do it and not pout. Just look at Brad, who has happily adapted & thrived.
El Oh El:
A lot of people would do a horrible job for a pile of money for a year or two because the money would make such a huge difference to their life. Would they keep doing it if they hated it once they did not need the money? I know I would not. (Proof: My retirement.)
The only question I see here is how people feel about the timing to ensure his guy gets a year.
skyIdub
Winged Warrior
Lmfao....TwitterX is literally a sewer that occasionally spits out pure diamonds.
This one is Top 20.
SampsonRelpenk
- Edwardsville, IL
I don't actually care that much, but something about leaving a profession because "aw shucks I'm just an old ball coach, I don't wanna deal with the money and egos and free player movement, the college game has lost its purity" and strategically bouncing so your buddy gets a chance to take over for you doesn't square for me.
purcy51
- Nappanee, IN
LOL, just spit out my whiskey!
I don't know who the worst vocalist is, Dylan or Rod Stewart, but they each made millions not being able to sing a freakin' lick!
Stewart also had a smoking hot supermodel wife, I believe. I don’t get it.
These coaches are complaining about the lack of near absolute control they once had and are talking out both sides of their mouths because god knows they will leave in heartbeat for a better situation.
Bennett will undoubtedly get his choice of cushy jobs (TV) the rest of his life, likely while continuing to advocate against the best interest of the same dudes that made him. Him leaving like this is a perfect example, it's a ego move at the expense of the school & players.
A big difference in the coach vs player discussion is that the coach is bound to the terms of a contract, the players have no such restrictions.
Not really in my opinion- if a school wants a coach they could always buy out his contract. It's just nowadays the school can do the same for players by enticing them with NIL money to transfer.
Yes, the school (or a school hiring a coach away) can pay a buyout, but each party (coach and school) receives "compensation" for the transaction that is in accordance with a contract. When a player leaves, the losing school receives nothing, so the only beneficiaries are the student and the gaining school. Instituting contracts via a collective bargaining agreement would at least restore a sort of balance in the relationships. Where once power and control were solely in the hands of the NCAA and the schools, now the pendulum has swung to the players. I don't believe it can remain so, and a CBA will rebalance that. Players would still have to ability to transfer/change teams. But it would be governed by the terms of a contract with provisions known by all.
Thanks for this post. I suppose it's possible that Bennett doesn't want guys to get fairly paid, but that's just speculation on the part of people.
This is the least sensible system of player compensation that one could arrive at and of course we got here by accident. It shows.
Everyone in the business and fans who love the sport should be looking for multi-year contracts at a minimum. Good for players and teams.
I think this is one of the few objectives the NCAA could actually achieve. Standardizing the transfer rules so the timing within the season essentially forces players into honoring one year or single season contracts. That and some of the other terms and conditions.
Call me a skeptic, but the problem as I see it, is that they chase the absolute maximum amount of money, rather than a set of rules that are well reasoned to serve both sides. And to be fair to how difficult the job is for the NCAA, they struggle with one size fits all rules for schools and conferences with a wide scope of financial interests. It takes time to get consensus, and they move slow as molasses.
The least sensible system was when every team but the Illini could pay players under the table. The least sensible system was when a player sold some of his gear thinking he's leaving for the draft, comes back, and gets suspended multiple games. I'm an Illini fan first and we're winning the system as it's built today.
There's no solution I've seen suggested that doesn't screw the players in some way. Any complaints I've seen of "the system can't sustain this" are farcical in my opinion, which boils down to "the future is now, old man".
Speaking of old man, it was quite a boys' club thing to do for Bennett to wait for this exact moment to retire so Virginia couldn't look elsewhere and had to let his guy coach this year. And this was right after he signed an extension, so much for contracts mattering. Oh, and it's too late for his players to go elsewhere because the rosters are set and everyone's enrolled. This is the man who's opinion people are valuing when it comes to how we should treat players? Give me a break. His behavior is so transparently anti-player it's a joke.
Last edited:
Wow. What a rant.
First, I agree Bennett's move was extremely low class.
As to his opinion, first has he offered one? I haven't yet seen it. Who values it? I haven't noticed.
I'm not sure why you believe a multi-year contract screws the players. But any player who thinks it screws them doesn't have to do it.
Yeah he was quoted as saying "The game and college athletics are not in a healthy spot. I think I was equipped to do the job the old way" and there's been articles released that effectively treat him like a martyr for the good ole days of officially unpaid players being stuck on teams.
There's no world where schools will offer contracts and accept players not signing them. While game theory suggests a school could target those contract-refusing players, history tells us the schools will collude "to preserve the sanctity of the game" or something. Frankly if contracts were a thing they'd at least be made consistent at the conference level, and only the power conferences need to implement them because there's not enough money in the lesser schools to compete for these players anyway.
We're essentially talking about the establishment of a minor league. Somehow minor league baseball and hockey have found ways to make contracts work for their athletes, there's no reason they wouldn't work for college football and basketball, the "new" minor league entities. I agree they cannot be at the institutional level, the need to be governed by a CBA that covers each sport. And by the way, with the future funding requirements for basketball and football, there will be no money left for the colleges to fund the non-revenue sports, which will send them all back to club level sports. And I don't even want to begin thinking about Title IX and how that will impact the whole enchilada . . .