3 ms·

This athlete got a scholarship, elite coaching, a college degree and is now playing her sport professionally. She's a beneficiary of the system, not a casualty

This athlete got a scholarship, elite coaching, a college degree and is now playing her sport professionally. She's a beneficiary of the system, not a casualty of it. The only harm that has been done is that the NCAA has written her out of its internal records (it's dishonest to say "My Career" when it explicitly refers to her achievements as a professed amateur). The NCAA does things that seem exploitative and wrong to me. But it also helps a lot of people. This young lady's outrage is not a good argument for the former.

crooked-v 6y ago
> it's dishonest to say "My Career" when it explicitly refers to her achievements as a professed amateur NCAA's claims of "amateurism" are blatantly dishonest in the first place. They control what are pro minor leagues in every way except for the denial of straightforward compensation to the players.
notacoward 6y ago
That's one of the worst ad hominems I've ever seen. Sure, the author herself might have done OK, but she's pretty explicit that the incident affected others and that there are many more who haven't been so fortunate. She even names several and tells their stories. She uses her own case only as an example, not as the basis for her entire argument. Dismissing it because "she's a beneficiary" is absurd.
- dmurray 6y ago
  > she's pretty explicit that the incident affected others and that there are many more who haven't been so fortunate. She even names several and tells their stories. For the three other athletes mentioned by name, in each case the story is that they had medical issues caused by, exacerbated by, or at least neglected by the NCAA. That's a real injustice and a real story. What happened to the author is meh.
  - notacoward 6y ago
    > What happened to the author is meh. So ignore it. Any time you find one part of an argument or its presentation lacking, just look past it. You'll find that it often doesn't affect the validity of the whole, and when that's the case picking on the non-essential part just shows bad faith.

crooked-v 6y ago

> it's dishonest to say "My Career" when it explicitly refers to her achievements as a professed amateur NCAA's claims of "amateurism" are blatantly dishonest in the first place. They control what are pro minor leagues in every way except for the denial of straightforward compensation to the players.

notacoward 6y ago

That's one of the worst ad hominems I've ever seen. Sure, the author herself might have done OK, but she's pretty explicit that the incident affected others and that there are many more who haven't been so fortunate. She even names several and tells their stories. She uses her own case only as an example, not as the basis for her entire argument. Dismissing it because "she's a beneficiary" is absurd.

dmurray 6y ago
> she's pretty explicit that the incident affected others and that there are many more who haven't been so fortunate. She even names several and tells their stories. For the three other athletes mentioned by name, in each case the story is that they had medical issues caused by, exacerbated by, or at least neglected by the NCAA. That's a real injustice and a real story. What happened to the author is meh.
- notacoward 6y ago
  > What happened to the author is meh. So ignore it. Any time you find one part of an argument or its presentation lacking, just look past it. You'll find that it often doesn't affect the validity of the whole, and when that's the case picking on the non-essential part just shows bad faith.