Trump Signs Executive Order on Transfer Portal

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

4 minutes ago, Fletcher said:

In the context of wrestling (i.e. the subject of this message board) less than 1% of all programs across D1-D3 are revenue positive. So I'd say schools don't need top athletes. In fact, they'd be better off financially without any wrestling program at all.

Way, way less. Approximately 0%.  Even PSU wrestling loses money for the institution.

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Fletcher said:

In the context of wrestling (i.e. the subject of this message board) less than 1% of all programs across D1-D3 are revenue positive. So I'd say schools don't need top athletes. In fact, they'd be better off financially without any wrestling program at all.

True.  I think when I said “schools” I was more referring to the donors funding the NIL payments 

[DazeofGrace]

6 hours ago, Fletcher said:

In the context of wrestling (i.e. the subject of this message board) less than 1% of all programs across D1-D3 are revenue positive. So I'd say schools don't need top athletes. In fact, they'd be better off financially without any wrestling program at all.

To hear you tell it, wrestling should just cease to exist because it isn’t revenue positive. If that’s the standard, then only football and basketball should exist, right? Or maybe that’s not actually how college athletics works. A lot of these so-called “non-revenue” programs are tied directly to enrollment. Those athletes are still students paying tuition (often out-of-state), and they help fill roster and enrollment spots schools actually need filled. On top of that, wrestling isn’t some massive financial drain, its overhead is relatively low compared to most sports, which makes its return on investment a lot better than people assume. So it’s not just a “cost” sitting on a balance sheet. In many cases, it’s part of the school’s broader enrollment and funding strategy. Cut a program like that, and you’re not just saving expenses, you’re also losing tuition dollars, alumni engagement, and donor support that doesn’t just magically get replaced. You’re looking at it strictly from a profit/loss standpoint, but universities don’t operate that simply.

[ionel]

10 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

 Those athletes are still students paying tuition (often out-of-state), and they help fill roster and enrollment spots schools actually need filled. 

You could look at it that way or one could say they are taking spots away from academic students.  Many/most major conference universities limit enrollment.  Thus lower qualified athletes (especially football & basketball) are taking enrollment spots away from more qualified academic students who are willing to pay full tuition.  What is even worse is that NIL and the portal/transfers show that these athletes appear to not even have an interest in obtaining a degree from said university.  They are willing to go wherever they can get the most money.  

[DazeofGrace]

26 minutes ago, ionel said:

You could look at it that way or one could say they are taking spots away from academic students.  Many/most major conference universities limit enrollment.  Thus lower qualified athletes (especially football & basketball) are taking enrollment spots away from more qualified academic students who are willing to pay full tuition.  What is even worse is that NIL and the portal/transfers show that these athletes appear to not even have an interest in obtaining a degree from said university.  They are willing to go wherever they can get the most money.  

You’re shifting the argument now. Originally this was about whether wrestling is financially worth it. Now it’s about athletes “taking spots” from academic students. Those aren’t the same conversation. If we’re talking admissions, schools admit athletes ON PURPOSE. It’s not like they’re sneaking in &stealing seats, rosters are built into how universities structure enrollment. In a lot of cases, athletes actually help balance enrollment targets (especially male/female ratios) and bring in tuition that wouldn’t otherwise be there. And the idea that it’s mostly “lower qualified” athletes taking spots doesn’t really hold up, especially in sports like wrestling. A lot of these kids are strong students, and many are paying significant tuition themselves. As for NIL& transfers, yeah, that’s a separate issue across all major sports, but that’s mostly impacting football and basketball. It’s not really a driving factor in whether sports like wrestling should exist or not. So if the original point is still about whether programs like wrestling are worth having, none of that really changes the core reality: schools aren’t running athletics as simple profit/loss businesses, and cutting programs doesn’t automatically put them in a better financial position.

[ionel]

1 minute ago, DazeofGrace said:

 

You’re shifting the argument now. Originally this was about whether wrestling is financially worth it. Now it’s about athletes “taking spots” from academic students. Those aren’t the same conversation. If we’re talking admissions, schools admit athletes ON PURPOSE. It’s not like they’re sneaking in &stealing seats, rosters are built into how universities structure enrollment. In a lot of cases, athletes actually help balance enrollment targets (especially male/female ratios) and bring in tuition that wouldn’t otherwise be there. And the idea that it’s mostly “lower qualified” athletes taking spots doesn’t really hold up, especially in sports like wrestling. A lot of these kids are strong students, and many are paying significant tuition themselves. As for NIL& transfers, yeah, that’s a separate issue across all major sports, but that’s mostly impacting football and basketball. It’s not really a driving factor in whether sports like wrestling should exist or not. So if the original point is still about whether programs like wrestling are worth having, none of that really changes the core reality: schools aren’t running athletics as simple profit/loss businesses, and cutting programs doesn’t automatically put them in a better financial position.

What do you think the whole Varsity Blues scandal was about?  Why does football, and others, need or get lower admission standards.  I take pride in knowing i might just have been the first ever poster to "shift" a topic.  

[Caveira]

9 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

 

You’re shifting the argument now. Originally this was about whether wrestling is financially worth it. Now it’s about athletes “taking spots” from academic students. Those aren’t the same conversation. If we’re talking admissions, schools admit athletes ON PURPOSE. It’s not like they’re sneaking in &stealing seats, rosters are built into how universities structure enrollment. In a lot of cases, athletes actually help balance enrollment targets (especially male/female ratios) and bring in tuition that wouldn’t otherwise be there. And the idea that it’s mostly “lower qualified” athletes taking spots doesn’t really hold up, especially in sports like wrestling. A lot of these kids are strong students, and many are paying significant tuition themselves. As for NIL& transfers, yeah, that’s a separate issue across all major sports, but that’s mostly impacting football and basketball. It’s not really a driving factor in whether sports like wrestling should exist or not. So if the original point is still about whether programs like wrestling are worth having, none of that really changes the core reality: schools aren’t running athletics as simple profit/loss businesses, and cutting programs doesn’t automatically put them in a better financial position.

Your font choices are a topic shifter I think 

[DazeofGrace]

13 minutes ago, ionel said:

What do you think the whole Varsity Blues scandal was about?  Why does football, and others, need or get lower admission standards.  I take pride in knowing i might just have been the first ever poster to "shift" a topic.  

Varsity Blues isn’t really the example you think it is. That scandal wasn’t about athletes taking spots, it was about wealthy non-athletes buying their way in and using fake athletic credentials as a loophole. If anything, it proves the opposite point: schools value athletics enough that people were trying to exploit it. And yeah, athletes in some sports get admissions consideration. That’s not some hidden flaw, that’s by design. Universities aren’t purely academic institutions, they’re building entire campuses, cultures, & programs. Athletics is part of that whether people like it or not. But even if you want to go down that road, it still doesn’t answer the original point. This started as a financial argument, whether programs like wrestling are worth having. Shifting it to admissions standards doesn’t really change the economics of it. And lumping all sports together doesn’t really work either. The NIL/transfer chaos you’re talking about is heavily concentrated in football and basketball. That’s not what’s driving decisions around sports like wrestling. At the end of the day, schools clearly don’t operate on a simple “profit only” model, or most of these programs wouldn’t exist in the first place.

[ionel]

Just now, DazeofGrace said:

 

Varsity Blues isn’t really the example you think it is. That scandal wasn’t about athletes taking spots, it was about wealthy non-athletes buying their way in and using fake athletic credentials as a loophole. 

It was about how athletic programs have lower admission standards.  Thus kids who couldn't qualify to get it in used it to cheat the admission system.  Just claim my kid was on high school crew and get in by being accepted on the rowing team of course the plan is to drop crew before any workouts.  VB shows athletes are taking academic spots.  I'm not suggesting eliminate but let's be honest about what is going on.  

 

PS: if you increase your font size we won't have to read past the first sentence. 

[MPhillips]

2 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Your font choices are a topic shifter I think 

It does not, a point make...

[flyingcement]

5 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

It does not, a point make...

so increasing the point of the font doesn't increase the validity of the point?  my english teachers must have been bogus

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, flyingcement said:

my english teachers must have been bogus

Do you believe me now...

[DazeofGrace]

27 minutes ago, ionel said:

It was about how athletic programs have lower admission standards.  Thus kids who couldn't qualify to get it in used it to cheat the admission system.  Just claim my kid was on high school crew and get in by being accepted on the rowing team of course the plan is to drop crew before any workouts.  VB shows athletes are taking academic spots.  I'm not suggesting eliminate but let's be honest about what is going on.  

 

PS: if you increase your font size we won't have to read past the first sentence. 

You’re confidently wrong here. Varsity Blues didn’t expose athletes “taking spots”, it exposed rich families faking athletes because they couldn’t get in otherwise. That’s the entire point. Those kids weren’t competing, weren’t training, and in many cases never even touched the sport. They were frauds, not athletes. So using that as evidence against actual athletes makes zero sense. If anything, it proves the opposite, that being a legitimate athlete has real value in admissions, which is exactly why people tried to cheat their way into that category. And let’s stop pretending this is some accidental loophole. Schools intentionally recruit athletes because they bring value to the university revenue, visibility, alumni engagement, campus culture. They’re not “stealing academic spots,” they’re being admitted for a different set of qualifications, just like any other specialized admit. You’re taking a fraud case and trying to stretch it into an argument against real athletes. That’s not being honest about what happened, it’s just forcing a narrative. Sorry my font is triggering you.

[ionel]

6 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

 

You’re confidently wrong here. Varsity Blues didn’t expose athletes “taking spots”, it exposed rich families faking athletes because they couldn’t get in otherwise. That’s the entire point. Those kids weren’t competing, weren’t training, and in many cases never even touched the sport. They were frauds, not athletes. So using that as evidence against actual athletes makes zero sense. If anything, it proves the opposite, that being a legitimate athlete has real value in admissions, which is exactly why people tried to cheat their way into that category. And let’s stop pretending this is some accidental loophole. Schools intentionally recruit athletes because they bring value to the university revenue, visibility, alumni engagement, campus culture. They’re not “stealing academic spots,” they’re being admitted for a different set of qualifications, just like any other specialized admit. You’re taking a fraud case and trying to stretch it into an argument against real athletes. That’s not being honest about what happened, it’s just forcing a narrative. Sorry my font is triggering you.

[DazeofGrace]

11 minutes ago, ionel said:

Posting a meme instead of responding is basically you conceding. Varsity Blues was people FAKING BEING ATHLETES because they couldn’t get in on their own. That’s not athletes taking spots, that’s non-athletes committing fraud to access a lane they didn’t earn. So your entire example actually proves my point. If athletes didn’t have real value in admissions, nobody would’ve needed to pretend to be one. You started with a take, got corrected, and now you’re hiding behind a picture because you don’t have an argument left. We’re done here.

[Caveira]

2 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

 

Posting a meme instead of responding is basically you conceding. Varsity Blues was people FAKING BEING ATHLETES because they couldn’t get in on their own. That’s not athletes taking spots, that’s non-athletes committing fraud to access a lane they didn’t earn. So your entire example actually proves my point. If athletes didn’t have real value in admissions, nobody would’ve needed to pretend to be one. You started with a take, got corrected, and now you’re hiding behind a picture because you don’t have an argument left. We’re done here.

If academic standards are lowered for athletes how does that not take spots from smarter kids ?

[MPhillips]

40 minutes ago, flyingcement said:

so increasing the point of the font doesn't increase the validity of the point?  my english teachers must have been bogus

I may be back peddling. Big font is wearing me d o w n . . .   

[ionel]

17 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

 

Posting a meme instead of responding is basically you conceding. Varsity Blues was people FAKING BEING ATHLETES because they couldn’t get in on their own. That’s not athletes taking spots, that’s non-athletes committing fraud to access a lane they didn’t earn. So your entire example actually proves my point. If athletes didn’t have real value in admissions, nobody would’ve needed to pretend to be one. You started with a take, got corrected, and now you’re hiding behind a picture because you don’t have an argument left. We’re done here.

[DazeofGrace]

17 minutes ago, Caveira said:

If academic standards are lowered for athletes how does that not take spots from smarter kids ?

You’re asking the question like all spots are the same,  they’re not. Schools don’t have one big pile of “academic spots” that athletes are stealing from. They build a class with different buckets;  academics, athletics, arts, diversity, etc. Athletes aren’t displacing top academic admits, they’re being admitted for a different role the university intentionally values. By your logic, musicians are “taking spots” from smarter kids. So are legacy admits. So are students with unique backgrounds. That’s not how admissions works. And calling them “smarter kids” like the only metric that matters is GPA/test scores just shows you don’t understand what schools are actually building. Athletes aren’t sneaking in. They’re recruited on purpose.So no, they’re not taking spots. You’re just misunderstanding how the system is designed. You’re arguing like there is one bucket or scoreboard, there isn’t.

[Caveira]

1 minute ago, DazeofGrace said:

You’re asking the question like all spots are the same,  they’re not. Schools don’t have one big pile of “academic spots” that athletes are stealing from. They build a class with different buckets;  academics, athletics, arts, diversity, etc. Athletes aren’t displacing top academic admits, they’re being admitted for a different role the university intentionally values. By your logic, musicians are “taking spots” from smarter kids. So are legacy admits. So are students with unique backgrounds. That’s not how admissions works. And calling them “smarter kids” like the only metric that matters is GPA/test scores just shows you don’t understand what schools are actually building. Athletes aren’t sneaking in. They’re recruited on purpose.So no, they’re not taking spots. You’re just misunderstanding how the system is designed. You’re arguing like there is one bucket or scoreboard, there isn’t.

That’s a lot of words for sometimes / often they steal spots from smarter  kids … sometimes athletes can’t even read or have zero desire to go to class 

Edited April 7 by Caveira

[DazeofGrace]

3 minutes ago, ionel said:

Nothing gives me more pleasure on these boards than reducing a guy who perceives himself as smarter or behaves more aloof, to posting little kid memes. You just made my night. 

[DazeofGrace]

10 minutes ago, Caveira said:

That’s a lot of words for sometimes / often they steal spots from smarter  kids … sometimes athletes can’t even read or have zero desire to go to class 

So we’ve gone from an argument to “sometimes / often” & random stereotypes. Got it. You still haven’t addressed the actual point, admissions are not one single academic leaderboard where athletes are “stealing” spots. Schools build classes intentionally, & athletes are one of the categories they choose to admit. And now you’re down to “athletes can’t read” and “don’t go to class”? That’s not an argument, that’s just lazy, outdated nonsense. Are there athletes who don’t care about school? Sure. There are also non-athletes who cheat, skip class, and do the bare minimum. That’s not unique to athletes, & pretending it is just shows you don’t have anything real to stand on. You keep saying “they take spots from smarter kids” but you can’t actually explain how, because it’s not how admissions works. At this point you’re not debating the system, you’re just repeating talking points and hoping they stick. You’re not making a case, you’re just lowering the quality of your argument in every reply.

[Fletcher]

12 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

Nothing gives me more pleasure on these boards...

Dude - you've been on this board for one day and been involved with exactly one thread (this one).

[DazeofGrace]

Just now, Fletcher said:

Dude - you've been on this board for one day and been involved with exactly one thread (this one).

I guess you didn’t know that this isn’t the only forum that exists. That is adorable. I’m trying to white glove this so as not to shock you out of your seat, it isn’t. In fact, sit down before you read this part, there are millions of them. AND….those have hundreds of millions of threads. 

[Caveira]

16 minutes ago, DazeofGrace said:

So we’ve gone from an argument to “sometimes / often” & random stereotypes. Got it. You still haven’t addressed the actual point, admissions are not one single academic leaderboard where athletes are “stealing” spots. Schools build classes intentionally, & athletes are one of the categories they choose to admit. And now you’re down to “athletes can’t read” and “don’t go to class”? That’s not an argument, that’s just lazy, outdated nonsense. Are there athletes who don’t care about school? Sure. There are also non-athletes who cheat, skip class, and do the bare minimum. That’s not unique to athletes, & pretending it is just shows you don’t have anything real to stand on. You keep saying “they take spots from smarter kids” but you can’t actually explain how, because it’s not how admissions works. At this point you’re not debating the system, you’re just repeating talking points and hoping they stick. You’re not making a case, you’re just lowering the quality of your argument in every reply.

Why should a kid who can’t read spell or go to class take a spot from a smart kid?

They should be  student athletes first.  Not just meat sticks 

Edited April 7 by Caveira