Indeed! How you even find them is beyond me: I always get lost with the university tennis pages.
I did, though, find that Jack Findel-Hawkins made the QFs of the Oracles Masters, where he was vanquished 6-7 (4), 6-2, 6-3 by one David Biosca from East Tennessee State, otherwise known as (ETSU) on the results sheet.
Ryan Peniston, seeded 4th, lost in the 2nd round to Shaun Hadavi from Columbia (university, not Colombia) 6-2, 7-5.
Andrew Watson lost in the 1st round to Diogo (not a typo) Rocha from Denver 6-0 6-3.
Vinny Gillespie also lost in the 1st round to a familiar name from futures tournaments, William Bushemuka - a tight match, though: 6-1 3-6 6-4
Jacob Whalley also lost in the 1st round to the second seed, Ryotaro Matsumura, 6-0 6-1
This list is also a tribute to The Optimist, as it was done by correlating the wonderfully comprehensive list at the start of this thread with the draw sheet. Just hope I haven't missed any!
All present and correct Spectator! (Although you could have just read the results I put up earlier ). They have got a bit lost in all the regional results I've posted though. The only result missing is in the mixed dubs:
R16
Jasmine Lee / Arthur Rinderknech (Mississippi State/Texas A&M) BT Gabriela Porubin / Vinny Gillespie (Wichita State/Drake) 6-2
And that's the end of British interest in the ITA Oracle Masters
ESPN have a $7 billion dollar contract over 12 years to televise a fixed number of regular college games, bowl games and BCS championship college football games, and that is just a small amount of the estimate $9 Billion annual income of college football.
Nick Sabin coach of the Albama "Crimson tide" 100k capacity stadium (no empty seats) in a state with no NFL and no one cares (they also have Auburn) because SEC college football is so massive, gets $7 million a year, jim Harbaugh has given up the NFL (gets $5 million at Michigan) and Pete Carroll at USC for years and years looked like his was never going to bother, life was so cushty, is now finally ripping it up at the Seattle Seahawks. This is a lucrative business up there with all other professional sports.
If you survive playing at the highest level to your senior year and become draft eligible (many very talent players have careers ripped from them in their early 20's through injuries) you have about a 7% chance of getting drafted (250 players) a small proportion of these players sign massive contracts, the majority get cut and scrap around for smaller contracts.
$500 a month allowance to the players who take incredible physical risks and put on a show that entertains a nation every Saturday sept-January is criminal when it makes billions for people who take no risk at all. The athletic departments which are multi million pound businesses should pay them, in comparison Mike Ashley is a saint!
-- Edited by Oakland2002 on Sunday 16th of October 2016 06:39:16 AM
I read an article in the US press last year (can't recall which paper now) about the finances of college sport, in relation to this new payment required by the NCAA, and the announcement that the budget cap for athlete food was being removed (in place before to prevent big schools gaining an advantage in the nutrition stakes). Although some of the detail is a bit hazy now a few key figures stuck in my mind. Firstly the NCAA was making about $20 million available to schools to help implement the policy (no idea now on what basis or distribution formula) so that must be a wealthy organisation in its own right. Secondly, the SEC had set up a TV deal with ESPN to cover all their sport on an exclusive channel and each school in the conference had received a cheque at the end of the first year of operation for $34 million!! It also pointed out that many schools / conferences don't have access to anything like that kind of cash and that running sports there is more of a budgeting exercise. And it also gave the percentage of players drafted in the major revenue sports (football, baseball, basketball). Can't recall any exact figures but an absolutely tiny percentage.
So yes, morally the big schools should give their athletes a more generous allowance or put some cash in trust for them in case of injury or for when they leave college, but this goes against the ethos of college sport being a level playing field as it would increase the divide between the rich power conferences and the rest and result in sport being downgraded or lost in the schools with less cash flowing in from it.
Optimist thank you, I agree with a lot of what you say and the grandiose principles of the NCAA would have some merit if there weren't so many double standards.
The chances of being drafted from one of the pro-schools in every way bar the salaries they don't play the players is so much better than that at a lesser football school (where there is still plenty of money to be made). The players know that and historically the programs with the best kick backs got the superstar boys who were at college to just play football, USC, Miami etc..., the colleges know that and readily shift conferences to cut better deals.
These are young men not boys who should be able to make a living, everyone else is, from the entertainment they provide during some of the prime of their sport.
Not sure Oakie that I really take a position on this, I can see both sides have of the argument.
Taking the power conferences in isolation they earn a massive amount of revenue from their athletic activities. Their coaches are paid comensurate with professional sport, their athletes are worked REALLY hard and academics are not really allowed to get in the way - it not being uncommon for athletes to be encouraged to take a weaker major if there is any clash between the two. Given the athletes in all sports in these conferences are professionals in all but name, generating huge TV income, merchandising and ticket sales in some sports, are expected to do masses of PR work etc etc in all sports, it seems right that they should be paid as professionals or, in the case of sports such as tennis and golf, keep any professional earnings. Even if such monies should be held in trust for them until college is finished.
On the other hand, doing this would decimate sport outside of those conferences and school and college sport at all levels is a fundamental aspect of American life. The NCAA has a duty as the overarching college sports body to all participants in college sport and has to set rules that ensure the widest participation along with a high profile and top standards.
As I say, not sure where I stand but do agree that whichever side you view it from, plenty of double standards to be seen!