CBS: Candid Coaches: Will name, image and likeness legislation increase or decrease cheating in college sports? (61% say it will lead to an INCREASE)

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
54,171
Reaction score
4,533
Points
113
per CBS:

Will NIL rules increase or decrease cheating in college sports?​

Increase61%
Decrease34%
Stay the same5%

Quotes that stood out​

Those who said cheating will increase​

  • "It will increase because the current rule is coaches can't have involvement in setting up deals. If you believe coaches won't set up deals, then please let me sell you a bridge in Brooklyn."
  • "It's legal cheating. There's no other way to put it. It's legal cheating. I can arrange for FedEx to offer this guy a million dollars in NIL. It's nasty, it's ugly, but it is legal. All bets are off."
  • "Are you serious!? Cheating has been around since I was born and it's only gotten worse, even with coaches doing jail time. I can't tell you enough how glad I am to be out of the SEC."
  • "We basically have put in place an unenforceable rule in that the coaches or the administrations cannot have guidance to the young players in terms of NIL. So anyone who believes that is truly going to be the case at 100 out of 100 schools is turning a blind eye to reality. How can the coaches not be involved? If you're guiding them, and crossing the line by presenting them opportunities, it's going to go hand in hand. You certainly have the parents asking. I believe there will become a cottage industry of jobs that deal with this on campuses in football and basketball."
  • "It will increase and the lies/promises will continue to get worse. I think that has become one of the first questions you ask a prospect in the process now. The crazy thing that these people don't understand is that there's only about 15-20 NBA guys that actually make the big money from an endorsement perspective. And the majority of our guys are not bona fide NBA pros. What NBA role players actually have big endorsement deals?"
  • "The answers to this should be 100% (for cheating). Everyone knows what's going out there. It's at the forefront of people's decision-making process. 'What's up with NIL? Do you guys do NIL?' People don't even know what it means and how it's supposed to be used, but it's something for kids or families to make money while they're in college. Technically we're not supposed to be involved with it at all. You're supposed to have an agent, supposed to deal with compliance directly, but I don't think a lot of programs are treating it that way."
  • "It will likely increase because there is no way that some of the alleged promises being made can happen without cheating. It also makes the cheating easier to accomplish because the amount of cash being moved around now has escalated incredibly over the years."
  • "I think there's going to be a big increase and the reasoning behind it is -- from what I've heard -- the money never really goes to the kid. Somebody around them does, and what's going to happen is those people are going to want their own NIL and want it tax-free. I think it will go up, I really do, I don't see it going away. There's no chance in hell it goes down."

Those who said cheating will decrease​

  • "There are ways of now using NIL to curb the need to go outside the rules. As many have spoken out about, this will now create another issue with transfers and false promises to recruits."
  • "It will have very little impact, as only a small percentage of athletes will benefit from NIL. I think it will decrease but only slightly in the short term."
  • "I believe it will actually make things more transparent. I know a lot of schools are jockeying to figure out how to 'legally' pay recruits and their own players. Will be interesting to see what happens when someone pays a recruit a lot of money and they don't turn out as advertised or they transfer after one season. Will be easy to piss off a donor!"
  • "Athletic departments are already organizing NIL programs that will promise income to players. In many cases, the donors don't know who the prospects are. What's that called? NIL? Cheating?"
  • "It technically decreases cheating because it's legalized it. But more teams will illegally facilitate NIL deals for players."

Those who said it will stay the same​

  • "Can we define cheating? NIL has brought things to light, but nothing has been done with the bombshell dropped on college basketball a few years ago. Why would anything change with regards to how some have conducted business?"
  • "Cheaters will still cheat. It is still happening. No point in complaining about it. Just know who you are recruiting against and don't waste your time. If you lose a dude due to cheating it means one of two things: you were either outbid -- most likely scenario -- or you were so stupid you didn't know it was a bidding war and wasted your time as an assistant -- and your head coach's time as well."
  • "I think all the rules should go away. All of them. They're pointless. There's no enforceability. So let's stop the charade and say: Coaches, schools, you can do whatever you want to do. It's not going to decrease cheating, you know why? Because the people who were cheating before the FBI came to town -- they're still cheating. And the people who weren't? They're still not engaging in that stuff. It's moot. It's totally irrelevant to how the sport actually operates. It's a morality deal. You can't legislate."
  • "It's going to stay the same. The schools that are top-tier teams in their sport will continue. You can open up cheating across the board, but Alabama's going to be the best football team in the country and Kentucky is going to get the best players in the country. But if you got FedEx doing whatever, then yeah, there will be outliers. But at the end of the day, the sustainability of the Dukes, North Carolinas, Kentuckys, Kansases of the world [won't change]."

Go Gophers!!
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
11,497
Reaction score
3,499
Points
113
So close to 50/50
As in nobody knows
 


Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
11,497
Reaction score
3,499
Points
113
Or 22% higher than 50/50. And if anyone knows if this will lead to more cheating, its likely coaches.

Go Gophers!!
On what planet is 61% 22% higher than 50/50?

what is the margin of error on the poll?
is it even a scientific poll?
 




Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
11,497
Reaction score
3,499
Points
113
ummm... Earth...

Basic math... 50 x 122% equals 61....
It’s 22% higher as a percentage of 50.
It is 11% higher as a percentage of 100.

so when comparing to 50% it is 22% higher.
So I guess I’m wrong and you are right.
Thanks for the lesson.


What is the margin of error?
Is it even a scientific poll
 

Some guy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 1, 2014
Messages
11,497
Reaction score
3,499
Points
113
Got it.
So of 100 willing participants in a survey of all college basketball coaches 61 thought it would make cheating worse.
39 thought it would make cheating better. 5 no chance.

so those 11 coaches in the 100 self-selected respondents

To have a 99% confidence interval that sample of the 358 head coaches would lead to exactly an 11% margin of error.
Which means that it statistically is 50/50 if it is a random sample. Which it isn’t.



But since it isn’t limited to head coaches. For a 99% confidence interval of the not randomly choosen 100 of the 1032 college assistants+Heads…it’s actually mathematically possible only 49 coaches THINK it will cause more cheating.


It isn’t basically 50/50
It’s 22% more than 50/50
But 50/50 is within the margin of error assuming it’s a random sample (which it isn’t)
 




Top Bottom