ADVERTISEMENT

Perkins to Mizzou

A team can turn it around in one year with the right mix of players being brought in. Even a team that flailed as badly as mizzou last year could have a significant one year turnaround.
But beyond that, despite any X feed statements to the contrary, this is about getting paid. It makes absolute sense for a player with one year of eligibility left to to get the $$ while he can. Tony P. has a decent game. Is he an NBA level talent at his position? No. Can he make some money playing overseas? Seems likely. Why not make a few hundred K in the US first before plying his trade in Europe or wherever else he might end up?
Mizzou definitely worked some turnaround magic on the gridiron this past season…
 
Right now there are two groups of power 6 schools. Those like Missouri that will pay for guys. And those like Iowa, that will end up with whomever is left and not getting any serious NIL money. It’s concerning for the sport and for Iowa as well.
 
I like how so many in this thread are saying "Oh god yeah he's definitely not worth $400k a year. you could get an amazing top tier point guard for that muchhhhhhh!!!!!1!!!"

When, in fact, you have no idea what these players are being paid. Tony got $400k so that just shows the ignorance on this board to what these players are worth. Tony was one of the best guards in the Big Ten conference. His skill and his experience are worth big money to a team looking for leadership.
Leadership? Tony? yeah he led the team to the NIT... woohoo. Notice no blue blood teams came calling. In fact, no top 50 - 100 team was willing to pay for his skillset & "leadership".
 

Josh Kroenke played for Mizzou and grew up in Columbia. His dad is Stan Kroenke, the pro sports mogul and his mother is Ann Walton, Sam's niece and Bud's daughter. Her sister, Nancy, is married to Bill Laurie, who played on the Memphis State team that lost to Bill Walton and UCLA in the NCAA Championship game. His younger brother, Barry, later played for Mizzou. The Lauries and the Walton sisters all grew up in the small town of Versailles, MO, north of the Lake of the Ozarks. Stan Kroenke grew up in an even smaller town, Stover, population about 450, west of Versailles.

Bill and Nancy still live in Columbia and have been huge Mizzou basketball boosters. They donated $25M for Mizzou Arena. No one knows, though it's reasonable to assume he is a benefactor of Mizzou's NIL, that is one of the top ones in the country.

On a somewhat related note, Mizzou has the 4th rated basketball recruiting class hitting campus in May and June. They are also strong contenders for 2-3 other highly rated transfers.
 
Leadership? Tony? yeah he led the team to the NIT... woohoo. Notice no blue blood teams came calling. In fact, no top 50 - 100 team was willing to pay for his skillset & "leadership".
I don't think it was Tony's fault he was on an NIT caliber team. He is a good player.

How do you know what other teams were paying? Maybe the blue bloods offered him $350k. Again the point is people were/are pissing and moaning about what a player like Tony is worth and he's proven that his market value was 400k.
 
This twitter thing is pretty odd. He's arguing in that thread about it not being about the money. It's weird how his attitude just went South the last few games of the season. You could tell he didn't want to be here. Not sure what happened. He gave us 4 years and for the most part played his ass off. I'm not going to complain about a guy who ended up 2nd team All Big Ten.
Well if he did get 400k then it was about the money.

I feel like his attitude went south after they were eliminated from the bubble.

Whats shocking is missouri having 400k to give to him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAWK
So you’d prefer to run back with the same backcourt that got the Hawks to the NIT? Time for the old guys to leave (Perkins, McCaffery, Krikke) & try with young guys + new blood.
What's amazing is that most coaches play 5 or 6 guards in a rotation and we have people on here thanking its going to be an upgrade to only have 2 on the roster.

All of this can't end soon enough for me.
 
What's amazing is that most coaches play 5 or 6 guards in a rotation and we have people on here thanking its going to be an upgrade to only have 2 on the roster.

All of this can't end soon enough for me.
Yes we all agree with you that three guards should have shared the floor more often last season. You’re not breaking any ground.
 
Well if he did get 400k then it was about the money.

I feel like his attitude went south after they were eliminated from the bubble.

Whats shocking is missouri having 400k to give to him.
Mizzou got an anonymous 62 million dollar donor and 12 million went to NIL.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Rambler Hawk
What's amazing is that most coaches play 5 or 6 guards in a rotation and we have people on here thanking its going to be an upgrade to only have 2 on the roster.

All of this can't end soon enough for me.
Dix and Perkins were Fran’s best backcourt by a lot. They were just paired with one of his worst frontcourts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RocknRollface
I don't think it was Tony's fault he was on an NIT caliber team. He is a good player.

How do you know what other teams were paying? Maybe the blue bloods offered him $350k. Again the point is people were/are pissing and moaning about what a player like Tony is worth and he's proven that his market value was 400k.
If a blue blood offered him close to Mizzou you don't think he'd have taken it? A chance to go far in NCAA tourney v. bottom of the barrel Mizzou?

Oh Come On Amazon Studios GIF by Amazon Prime Video
 
you mean Freeman & Sandfort? It was the lack of effort all around that was this team's problem. Not so much the front court. Krikke & PMac probably two of the worst defenders. But Freeman & Payton we're serviceable.
They were serviceable. They weren’t Keegan or Kris Murray. Or Luka and Joe W. Or Uthoff or Aaron White or Tyler Cook and the list goes on. But all those guys listed above just never had the guard play to do anything in March.
 
Last edited:
If a blue blood offered him close to Mizzou you don't think he'd have taken it? A chance to go far in NCAA tourney v. bottom of the barrel Mizzou?

Oh Come On Amazon Studios GIF by Amazon Prime Video
I don't know what drove Tony to pick Mizzou. Could have been money, could have been the promise that they're ponying up millions of dollars to bring in the best recruits available and a chance at a Natty.

You said top 100 programs didn't offer Tony money to come play and that's just silly.

He had widdled the list down to: Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ole Miss and Oregon. Those aren't top 100 programs?

We get it. You hate Tony. You think he wasn't good or a leader. Major program division 1 coaches disagree. I'm going to have to side with them on this one. Call me crazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bierhalter
I don't know what drove Tony to pick Mizzou. Could have been money, could have been the promise that they're ponying up millions of dollars to bring in the best recruits available and a chance at a Natty.

You said top 100 programs didn't offer Tony money to come play and that's just silly.

He had widdled the list down to: Arkansas, Indiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, Ole Miss and Oregon. Those aren't top 100 programs?

We get it. You hate Tony. You think he wasn't good or a leader. Major program division 1 coaches disagree. I'm going T
don't hate him, hate the inconsistency in effort. And if you think he bypassed a top proven program over a bottom feeding team, you're an

Idiot Reaction GIF
 
  • Wow
Reactions: ddeanHawk
don't hate him, hate the inconsistency in effort. And if you think he bypassed a top proven program over a bottom feeding team, you're an

Idiot Reaction GIF
He had a few bad games to end the season. If you think he didn't give effort his entire career at Iowa, you are the idiot. The kid was the toughness and fire on many teams.

Your posts wreak of sour grapes and Boomer NIL hate.
 
Yes we all agree with you that three guards should have shared the floor more often last season. You’re not breaking any ground.
The point is it's ridiculous to think Iowa will somehow be better at the guard spots next year.

Frans not bringing in anyone worth a shit.
 
Mizzou got an anonymous 62 million dollar donor and 12 million went to NIL.
I had no idea people cared about missouri sports. They probably think the same about Iowa I guess.

It's nice to know we're behind places like west Virginia and Missouri.
 
Per Trilly Donavon, Tony got $400K. So not as much as Fran said (likely was using what TP's agent asked for) but not too far off to be honest.
What a joke.
Tony had stretches of good play but 400k?? Wow talk about beer goggles basketball style …
 
  • Haha
Reactions: littlez
Tony and Fran are not the same. (I don't see a college coach worth multimillions either for that matter). yet you want to compare compensation for a college player and someone that has coached for 30 years is laughable and indicative of the mentality of most people these days.
there are 316 d 1 coaches with an average salary of $400,000. No player is worth than outside caitlin clark.
If any player were worth NIL pay for play in college they would/should be able to go to the G league and make that amount of money. They can't and that's the point, the value is not in tony perkins the value in in the name on the jersey.

The players are as valuable as what people are willing to pay them. The market is clearly showing that a player like Tony Perkins is worth at least $400k, and they’d be worth even more if the rules didn’t prevent them from being treated as employees.
 
  • Like
Reactions: littlez
I had no idea people cared about missouri sports. They probably think the same about Iowa I guess.

It's nice to know we're behind places like west Virginia and Missouri.
For now….but it $ounds like Mizzou is making a change. Iowa basketball may just morph into a glorified Mac basketball program - if it hasn’t already. If we do manage to recruit an above average player, don’t be surprised if he gets poached by programs with deep pockets….
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franisdaman
If they unionize, at what point do these "student athletes" become designated as employees?

and if that happens, do they pay taxes on the value of the following?
* Tuition, books
* Housing
* unlimited food
* professional coaching (hours x the going rate)
* professional training (hours x the going rate)

When I was a TA at Iowa, my scholarship was not taxable, but my stipend was taxable. It would not be difficult to draft rules similar for college athletes.

In my opinion:
  • Allow each college athlete to opt-into employee status.
    • Some athletes are not valuable enough to command more than the scholarship they are awarded. By electing non-employee status, their benefits are guaranteed and non-taxable.
    • For the athletes that do elect into employee status, employment contracts can lock them into a school for a period of time, just like coaches’ contracts. If the athlete wants to leave, the school they depart to may have to pay a buy-out. If the school wants to cut the player, the player may be entitled to a buy-out. The contract could also be structured to be incentive based.
  • Taxability:
    • Scholarships: No
    • Housing:
      • No if in general student housing.
      • Yes if not general student housing.
    • Food: No
    • Books / Tutors: No
    • Professional coaching: No.
      • This is rather obvious. What job on earth taxes employees for the training they receive? Pro athletes do not get taxed on the coaching they receive. I was never taxed on the tutelage I received from the partners at my firm.
    • Monetary / monetary equivalent compensation beyond scholarship: Yes.
      • If everything is brought above the table, we will no longer have to hypothesize what kind of under the table payments athletes are receiving. Put everyone on a level playing field. When I was a student at Iowa, I talked with football players that had stories from the NFL combine about how players from bigger schools were bragging how they got paid in college. For example, at Alabama the players were instructed to leave their car doors unlocked during practices. When they’d get back to the car, they’d have an envelope of cash in the glove compartment.
      • When everything is above the table, schools / boosters will not have to resort to “creative” ways of paying athletes.
The athletes are worth a lot to these schools, and it’s time people stop ignoring that economic reality.
 
When I was a TA at Iowa, my scholarship was not taxable, but my stipend was taxable. It would not be difficult to draft rules similar for college athletes.

In my opinion:
  • Allow each college athlete to opt-into employee status.
    • Some athletes are not valuable enough to command more than the scholarship they are awarded. By electing non-employee status, their benefits are guaranteed and non-taxable.
    • For the athletes that do elect into employee status, employment contracts can lock them into a school for a period of time, just like coaches’ contracts. If the athlete wants to leave, the school they depart to may have to pay a buy-out. If the school wants to cut the player, the player may be entitled to a buy-out. The contract could also be structured to be incentive based.
  • Taxability:
    • Scholarships: No
    • Housing:
      • No if in general student housing.
      • Yes if not general student housing.
    • Food: No
    • Books / Tutors: No
    • Professional coaching: No.
      • This is rather obvious. What job on earth taxes employees for the training they receive? Pro athletes do not get taxed on the coaching they receive. I was never taxed on the tutelage I received from the partners at my firm.
    • Monetary / monetary equivalent compensation beyond scholarship: Yes.
      • If everything is brought above the table, we will no longer have to hypothesize what kind of under the table payments athletes are receiving. Put everyone on a level playing field. When I was a student at Iowa, I talked with football players that had stories from the NFL combine about how players from bigger schools were bragging how they got paid in college. For example, at Alabama the players were instructed to leave their car doors unlocked during practices. When they’d get back to the car, they’d have an envelope of cash in the glove compartment.
      • When everything is above the table, schools / boosters will not have to resort to “creative” ways of paying athletes.
The athletes are worth a lot to these schools, and it’s time people stop ignoring that economic reality.
Are they worth a lot to the schools or just the athletic department? I am not being a wise guy but am asking a serious question.
 
My most charitable interpretation
Are they worth a lot to the schools or just the athletic department? I am not being a wise guy but am asking a serious question.

Athletic department directly, and indirect benefit to the school. For example, success in athletics has been shown to increase student applications. There is also indirect economic benefits to the school (visitors, merchandise purchases, etc.). A lot may also depend on how the specific school is structured. Iowa's athletic department is self-funded. While it is good that the academic wing does not have to subsidize sports, one could make a compelling argument that sports ought to help subsidize academics.

You raise a good point, which I think is more fundamental about whether it is good that college sports are so popular to begin with. The sports largely overshadow the academics, but the academics are what is supposed to provide value to society. The incentive structure for academics is unhealthy in many ways because it is a competition upwards to raise prices and exclusivity. The more a school spends, the more prestigious it can become, which can make the school more exclusive and increase tuition. Increased funding for universities does not cause tuition to go down - tuition only goes up. Schools don't become highly ranked for being able to offer low tuition for students. Students borrow more to attend school, many cannot afford to pay back student loans, and forgiving student loans presents its own can of worms best left to the off topic board.
 
My most charitable interpretation of Tony saying it is not about the money is that he could have bailed Iowa earlier to make more money, but he liked playing for Fran and the university.

But if he means something else, I struggle to see how he is right.
  1. I find it nearly impossible to believe that he won't get paid more at Missouri than he would at Iowa.
  2. He has one more year to play in college, which is his best chance to earn a lot of money playing basketball. With such a short window, his decision should be motivated by money. My reason to go to college was about the money - I saw it as an investment to obtain a better job after I was done. I think that generally ought to be the motivation for most people, with the exception that a "better" job might not necessarily mean higher compensation.
 
When I was a TA at Iowa, my scholarship was not taxable, but my stipend was taxable. It would not be difficult to draft rules similar for college athletes.

In my opinion:
  • Allow each college athlete to opt-into employee status.
    • Some athletes are not valuable enough to command more than the scholarship they are awarded. By electing non-employee status, their benefits are guaranteed and non-taxable.
    • For the athletes that do elect into employee status, employment contracts can lock them into a school for a period of time, just like coaches’ contracts. If the athlete wants to leave, the school they depart to may have to pay a buy-out. If the school wants to cut the player, the player may be entitled to a buy-out. The contract could also be structured to be incentive based.
  • Taxability:
    • Scholarships: No
    • Housing:
      • No if in general student housing.
      • Yes if not general student housing.
    • Food: No
    • Books / Tutors: No
    • Professional coaching: No.
      • This is rather obvious. What job on earth taxes employees for the training they receive? Pro athletes do not get taxed on the coaching they receive. I was never taxed on the tutelage I received from the partners at my firm.
    • Monetary / monetary equivalent compensation beyond scholarship: Yes.
      • If everything is brought above the table, we will no longer have to hypothesize what kind of under the table payments athletes are receiving. Put everyone on a level playing field. When I was a student at Iowa, I talked with football players that had stories from the NFL combine about how players from bigger schools were bragging how they got paid in college. For example, at Alabama the players were instructed to leave their car doors unlocked during practices. When they’d get back to the car, they’d have an envelope of cash in the glove compartment.
      • When everything is above the table, schools / boosters will not have to resort to “creative” ways of paying athletes.
The athletes are worth a lot to these schools, and it’s time people stop ignoring that economic reality.
When you were at TA, were you an "employee" of the school?

I assume you were a TA within your degree of study. For example, you were getting your advanced degree in something and you were a TA for entry level classes, right?

Just wondering. I think paying players would open up a whole new can of worms - that being the loss of the tax-exempt status of the football and basketball programs.

🤷‍♂️
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT