Are Regional Training Centers an unfair advantage?

[Lurker 709]

19 hours ago, TBar1977 said:

Who is paying post grads in lieu of scholarship money as an undergrad? That is possible, in theory, but who is actually doing that? 

Are you going to tell me I don't get the ;point? That its possible? I understand that. But its possible to pay athletes in myriads of other ways too. The idea is short sighted, but if you must and if you think it will "even the playing field". 

The best coaches will still win. 

Those are the rumors going around. That some instead of being on scholarship are promised rather large sum from RTC once they graduate. Haven’t heard any names. Just have heard that’s a big part of why it’s coming to a head. 

[tigerfan 107]

On 8/10/2019 at 10:34 AM, Lurker said:

Those are the rumors going around. That some instead of being on scholarship are promised rather large sum from RTC once they graduate. Haven’t heard any names. Just have heard that’s a big part of why it’s coming to a head. 

There are only 2 or 3 programs with the resources to even attempt something like that.  I am skeptical that this occurs with incoming recruits.  I think it's far more likely for a 5th year senior to be asked to take less schollie money so a prized recruit can be obtained, with the promise that the difference will be made up by the RTC upon graduation.  THAT situation is not uncommon, would be my guess.

[Lurker 709]

Just now, tigerfan said:

There are only 2 or 3 programs with the resources to even attempt something like that.  I am skeptical that this occurs with incoming recruits.  I think it's far more likely for a 5th year senior to be asked to take less schollie money so a prized recruit can be obtained, with the promise that the difference will be made up by the RTC upon graduation.  THAT situation is not uncommon, would be my guess.

Yeah I didn’t clarify it wasn’t referring to incoming freshman. Have no idea the truth to it and I’m not trying to levy that, just saying from what I’ve heard that’s kind of the center of the ruckus. 

[TBar1977 3,317]

On 8/10/2019 at 10:34 AM, Lurker said:

Those are the rumors going around. That some instead of being on scholarship are promised rather large sum from RTC once they graduate. Haven’t heard any names. Just have heard that’s a big part of why it’s coming to a head. 

1. Unfounded rumors

2. The guys getting paid to wrestle post grad at RTC's are the top guys when they are in college. So you think those top guys are going to a School without getting scholarship monies? Monies that are then paying for scholarships for lesser wrestlers? That sounds crazy. Also, schools like Ohio State, Iowa, Okie State, Cornell and PSU don't have to make promises. Everyone wrestling at those schools knows that if they are good enough they can get paid post grad. 

3. "Haven't heard any names" ....... No one ever mentions names, that is why the rumors are totally unfounded. 

4. If they get rid of RTC's I think they are just going to hurt wrestlers. 

Edited August 12 by TBar1977

[1032004 377]

The Rudis podcast on this was kinda interesting.   Askren basically came out and said people are cheating, but seemed to not know who (not that he didn't want to share, just that he didn't know), so I don't know how he was so confident.   Dernlan didn't really express any knowledge of people cheating, but did call out coaches for complaining about it without naming names.

[Lurker 709]

4 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

1. Unfounded rumors

2. The guys getting paid to wrestle post grad at RTC's are the top guys when they are in college. So you think those top guys are going to a School without getting scholarship monies? Monies that are then paying for scholarships for lesser wrestlers? That sounds crazy. Also, schools like Ohio State, Iowa, Okie State, Cornell and PSU don't have to make promises. Everyone wrestling at those schools knows that if they are good enough they can get paid post grad. 

3. "Haven't heard any names" ....... No one ever mentions names, that is why the rumors are totally unfounded. 

4. If they get rid of RTC's I think they are just going to hurt wrestlers. 

Not saying anything to the validity of the rumor. We’ve covered all this. 

[TBar1977 3,317]

8 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

The Rudis podcast on this was kinda interesting.   Askren basically came out and said people are cheating, but seemed to not know who (not that he didn't want to share, just that he didn't know), so I don't know how he was so confident.   Dernlan didn't really express any knowledge of people cheating, but did call out coaches for complaining about it without naming names.

Exactly.

Askren: "People are cheating"

Response: "Who is cheating"

Askren: "I have no idea who is cheating"

I like Askren but GEEZ. Just Lol. 

[1032004 377]

2 hours ago, TBar1977 said:

Exactly.

Askren: "People are cheating"

Response: "Who is cheating"

Askren: "I have no idea who is cheating"

I like Askren but GEEZ. Just Lol. 

True on Askren.   But Dernlan did seem to imply that the coaches that were complaining had specific schools in mind, but just didn't want to say anyone specifically.

[headshuck 1,954]

The new thing is to demand tax records of politicians, so maybe the records of athletes across programs will help us understand.

[TBar1977 3,317]

40 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

True on Askren.   But Dernlan did seem to imply that the coaches that were complaining had specific schools in mind, but just didn't want to say anyone specifically.

Dernlan can imply that, but the whole thing rings hollow when you refuse to name names. Its easy to infer the reason nobody names names is because they simply don't have anything. FRL nailed this. Their take last Thursday was that the coaches wrongly think that removing RTC's will slow down Penn State.  

if FRL is right, then its kind of petty to take a step that will obviously hurt wrestlers purely to try to knock down a college rival. Especially when the move is not likely to accomplish what they want. 

[headshuck 1,954]

Is the post-college compensation public record?

[TBar1977 3,317]

5 minutes ago, headshuck said:

Is the post-college compensation public record?

Probably not. Not for Profits file form 990 and must disclose salaries of only directors, officers and key employees. I doubt the wrestlers fall into any of those categories. 

[Lurker 709]

3 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Probably not. Not for Profits file form 990 and must disclose salaries of only directors, officers and key employees. I doubt the wrestlers fall into any of those categories. 

I don't know that the athletes are considered employees at all.  I think they would fall more under the sub contractor type realm.  

[TBar1977 3,317]

6 minutes ago, Lurker said:

I don't know that the athletes are considered employees at all.  I think they would fall more under the sub contractor type realm.  

That could easily be true. Probably is true. They could also be persons receiving grants from the non profit. Regardless, this is all the more likely they would never be legally required to break that stuff down to the  specific athlete level to anyone outside the IRS, and probably there only upon audit. 

Edited August 12 by TBar1977

[Lurker 709]

17 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Dernlan can imply that, but the whole thing rings hollow when you refuse to name names. Its easy to infer the reason nobody names names is because they simply don't have anything. FRL nailed this. Their take last Thursday was that the coaches wrongly think that removing RTC's will slow down Penn State.  

if FRL is right, then its kind of petty to take a step that will obviously hurt wrestlers purely to try to knock down a college rival. Especially when the move is not likely to accomplish what they want. 

A big reason not to name names is if you don't have the solid proof that could be used in court or something of that nature, you stand the chance of libel and defamation.  Not saying that is what is happening here, just saying not having any names is not the only reason to not name any names.  Obviously Askren said himself he doesn't have any.  Dernaln's take COULD be he knows of some names, but he's not going to put himself at risk by throwing them out there. 

Again not saying this is or isn't what is happening, truth of it is none of us here do.  Just to be objective.

Edited August 12 by Lurker

[TBar1977 3,317]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

A big reason not to name names is if you don't have the solid proof that could be used in court or something of that nature, you stand the chance of libel and defamation.  Not saying that is what is happening here, just saying not having any names is not the only reason to not name any names.  Obviously Askren said himself he doesn't have any.  Dernaln's take COULD be he knows of some names, but he's not going to put himself at risk by throwing them out there. 

If Dernlan knows of some names then I hope whomever he heard those names from that he advised them to contact the NCAA. 

[Lurker 709]

2 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

If Dernlan knows of some names then I hope whomever he heard those names from that he advised them to contact the NCAA. 

Agreed, but to be clear again I am not at all trying to imply that's the case.  Was just using as an example as why someone would not name names.  Doesn't have to be because they don't know any.  All I'm sayin.

[1032004 377]

3 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

If Dernlan knows of some names then I hope whomever he heard those names from that he advised them to contact the NCAA. 

Dernlan didn’t claim to have any specific complaints himself. And he did make the same suggestion regarding contacting the NCAA for the coaches that were complaining (which I would think wouldn’t open themselves up to the libel/defamation stuff.  I guess it’s also possible complaints have been submitted we just don’t know about them).

Edited August 12 by 1032004

[TBar1977 3,317]

1 minute ago, Lurker said:

Agreed, but to be clear again I am not at all trying to imply that's the case.  Was just using as an example as why someone would not name names.  Doesn't have to be because they don't know any.  All I'm sayin.

Gotcha. 

[osufan12 16]

I think whether you believe cheating is happening or not it is kind of pointless. 

RTCs have become critical to NCAA success. It is comical to have something be that critical to the success of NCAA wresting with no oversight from the NCAA. Hopefully they can find a solution without burning the whole system to the ground but there has to be some kind of oversight somewhere. You can't just trust everyone will be on their best behavior. 

People keep talking about "level playing field" as resources. To me it is about compliance. Some compliance departments are perfectly happy with going all in on the RTCs, others have been less enthusiastic. That creates a system where not every college is playing by the same rules. That is why the playing field isn't even, not money. The same schools will always spend the most on wrestling, RTC or no RTC. 

Edited August 12 by osufan12

[TBar1977 3,317]

5 minutes ago, osufan12 said:

I think whether you believe cheating is happening or not it is kind of pointless. 

RTCs have become critical to NCAA success. It is comical to have something be that critical to the success of NCAA wresting with no oversight from the NCAA. Hopefully they can find a solution without burning the whole system to the ground but there has to be some kind of oversight somewhere. You can't just trust everyone will be on their best behavior. 

People keep talking about "level playing field" as resources. To me it is about compliance. Some compliance departments are perfectly happy with going all in on the RTCs, others have been less enthusiastic. That creates a system where not every college is playing by the same rules. That is what the playing field isn't even, not money. The same schools will always spend the most on wrestling, RTC or no RTC. 

Yeah, but some schools think going all in on "athletics" is important while other schools are less enthusiastic there as well. This also creates an uneven playing field.

William and Mary don't spend as much money on athletics as, say, Oklahoma State. Should we adopt rules to prevent Oklahoma State from using T Boone Pickens' next donation for athletics because it gives them an edge over William and Mary and other like minded athletically spendthrift institutions?

Edited August 12 by TBar1977

[Lurker 709]

3 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Yeah, but some schools think going all in on "athletics" is important while other schools are less enthusiastic there as well. This also creates an uneven playing field.

William and Mary don't spend as much money on athletics as, say, Oklahoma State. Should we adopt rules to prevent Oklahoma State from using T Boone Pickens next donation for athletics because it gives them an edge over William and Mary and other like minded athletically spendthrift institutions. 

No, even playing field is about opportunity, not results.  Everyone has the opportunity for one of these.  It will be more challenging for some than others.  Some aren't as interested.  But the opportunity to build one is there for everyone.  That is an even playing field.

[TBar1977 3,317]

Just now, Lurker said:

No, even playing field is about opportunity, not results.  Everyone has the opportunity for one of these.  It will be more challenging for some than others.  Some aren't as interested.  But the opportunity to build one is there for everyone.  That is an even playing field.

You are preaching to the choir on this one, Lurker. I obviously agree. 

[Lurker 709]

3 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

You are preaching to the choir on this one, Lurker. I obviously agree. 

I know.  I wasn't trying to debate you.  Was expressing my view of it.  I like to chat in agreement as much as in debate as well....

[osufan12 16]

6 minutes ago, TBar1977 said:

Yeah, but some schools think going all in on "athletics" is important while other schools are less enthusiastic there as well. This also creates an uneven playing field.

William and Mary don't spend as much money on athletics as, say, Oklahoma State. Should we adopt rules to prevent Oklahoma State from using T Boone Pickens' next donation for athletics because it gives them an edge over William and Mary and other like minded athletically spendthrift institutions?

No that was exactly my point. It is not about dollars. Some schools will always spend more on certain things. You can't fix that and probably shouldn't want too. If X school wants to spend their resources on wrestling or the chess club that shouldn't be a problem. However, the rules should be all the same for the competitor schools whether they are spending nothing or millions. 

With no NCAA oversight, not all the schools are playing by the same rules. Compliance departments ultimately control all of this. Since the NCAA hasn't gotten involved each school is left to interpret the RTCs in their own way. That leads to different sets of rules.

More oversight shouldn't be a problem with anyone really. Just make sure everyone is following the rules. If there is no oversight then eventually the rules will be broken (if they aren't now). 

Edited August 12 by osufan12