Philip DeFranco targets NCAA, abusive coaches (& Urbz)

Submitted by Bluegriz on January 8th, 2019 at 8:59 PM

Philip DeFranco receives between 20-40 Million views per month of his daily show on YouTube. He has 6.3M subscribers on YouTube. For reference, the ESPN youtube channel has 4.4M subscribers.

Today he uploaded a video titled: The NCAA Does Not Care About Student Athletes And Here's The Proof...


There's nothing new in the video for frequent visitors to this site. But, points of interest:

  • The OSU/Meyer bit starts at 16:55 in the video. 
  • Maryland/Durkin starts at 21:00
  • Jalen Rose (briefly) at 1:44

TLDR: The video argues the NCAA was founded to protect athletes despite recent statements by the NCAA implying it is not their job to protect athletes. As a result, athletes are subjected to abusive leaders at a disproportionately high level. DeFranco implies at the end that coaches, assistant coaches, athletic departments, local journalists and the NCAA are not attempting to fix the problem, so he is raising awareness. His suggestion is to create an independent investigative entity. Video ends with a long scrolling list of abusive coaches.




January 8th, 2019 at 9:08 PM ^

Well damn. Certainly didn't expect DeFranco to make a video about this. Lot more research and history than I thought. Solid watch. 


I'm sure the "kids are snowflakes" crowd won't like the scientific data showing how positive reinforcement trumps punishment. 


January 8th, 2019 at 10:12 PM ^

I mean considering his views on women in sports and opposition to Title IX. Yeah he wouldn't be viewed positively. Good thing he's not coaching in 2019. 

Oh and if we're using 2019 morals on Bo, then lets use 2019 football expectations. Bo wouldn't be considered nearly as successful given his lopsided losing bowl record, annual loss to a mediocre team and 0 national titles. 

Section 1.8

January 8th, 2019 at 10:51 PM ^

I think it would be fascinating, if Bo Schembechler, Don Canham and Darrell Royal were all still here to say, “We warned you,” with regard to how we have turned college football programs into cash machines for large athletic departments with Title IX siphoning off funds per federal bureaucrats.


January 8th, 2019 at 11:12 PM ^

Why would Canham oppose the current state of college football? He pioneered the marketing and branding that college football lives off of. Granted, I don't know if he would like the corporatization of it. 

lol at the Title IX remark. Not gonna even get into that. 


January 9th, 2019 at 10:29 AM ^

I think this would be an interesting discussion.

Of course yes, he pioneered a lot of the ways that we market sports today.  On the other hand, he often fought hard against television (he refused to move the starting time of the 1983 Ohio State game, for example) and would have been very opposed to the idea of every single game being on television.  He would have certainly opposed the lengthening of every single game by 50 minutes just so the networks could show commercials. 

In my opinion, he would be one of the people identifying that there is an attendance bubble right now, and he would be on the side of reducing the presence of television and the price of tickets in order to get people in the seats.  He would have been opposed to the modern practice of taking the annual surplus and building unnecessary facilities with it instead of giving it to the University (which he started doing once the AD started making money).  And yes, I think you are right that he would have continued resisting the influence of corporations in college sports.

Section 1.8

January 9th, 2019 at 10:48 AM ^

Well let's be fair, and smart about the terms of this debate.

Collegiate athletics make money from television rights.  And collegiate athletics make money from ticket sales and loyal donors.

So far, most athletic directors and conference administrators have been trying to maximize both revenue streams simultaneously.  They have gotten away with it to a great extent because no one has called them out, on how they might be in conflict.

But now we are getting to that point.  We have television outlets dictating to conferences on when games will be played, and when those game times get determined.  We have television broadcasts substantially interfering with the in-stadium experience.

As I say, the athletic directors and the conferences have so far gotten away with selling out a lot, on behalf of their paying customers, for the non-paying customers watching on television.  TV is not going to complain.  The players and coaches aren't going to complain.  The athletic directors haven't been complaining, and why should they?  Their job is to sign off on balanced and ever-increasing budgets.

It is OUR job and OUR responsibility to make the case to our athletic directors.  To make this conflict known and to make the position of the AD's as uncomfortable as possible.  We need to create a cost to the schools and their conferences and their broadcast partners, for their disrespect of the in-stadium ticket buyers.



January 9th, 2019 at 12:18 PM ^


lol at the Title IX remark. Not gonna even get into that. 

So I guess facts like more than 400 men’s athletic teams have been eliminated as a result of Universities needing to become NCAA compliant doesn't fit your personal opinion.

Just sayin'.

And for the record, I'm not anti-Title IX, it has done some good.  I'm against anyone advancing a cause at the expense of others. 


January 9th, 2019 at 12:10 AM ^

Just look at the University of Michigan recently merging with Accenture and now completely, and baldly going full-on shameless corporation mode. Admin pay has skyrocketed, meanwhile any sort of solidarity among faculty/research staff is at an all-time low (if you haven't been around for the past 40+ years, you wouldn't have noticed).

UM academics are now themselves little individual business automatons, and the cuts/hiring of "younger" individuals (read: so they can pay MUCH less to desperate graduates who have HUGE student loans to pay back)

Former President Duderstadt would absolutley not stand for this absurdity.

Yeah, it's everywhere in contemporary culture. Historians will be absolutely bewildered at just how disconnected, passive, lethargic, tranquilized and seeminly inebriated, the american people were at this time in the face of massive corruption and exploitation.


January 9th, 2019 at 10:39 AM ^

same here... I make less in Net pay now than I did in 2005. Meanwhile all of our administration find it possible to receive $10,000 pay increases while we take cost saving cuts and increase in insurance cost sharing. The excuse is...with so few admins it's responsible spending to share the revenue in a smaller pool at $10,000 per admin vs say $1,000 per scum employee...with some general phrasing liberties on my end.

Harbaugh's Lef…

January 8th, 2019 at 9:23 PM ^

Serious question here... what does the NCAA do for college football? They don't schedule any games, they don't negotiate TV deals, hell... the NCAA neither organizes the CFP nor awards the National Champion. Can't the Power 5 just create their own governing body, one that actually does what they are suppose to?


January 8th, 2019 at 9:37 PM ^

Your last sentence is the exact reason why the NCAA does not do anything too aggressive. As soon as schools start losing money due to an overly aggressive compliance body (in their eyes) they will have incentive to create their own less aggressive enforcement agency that takes care of the low hanging fruit and not much else (much like the current NCAA). 


January 9th, 2019 at 9:58 AM ^

The P5 did start their own governing body.  It's called "The NCAA."

Really.  Yes, other schools have votes, but I doubt that you can tell me about one single NCAA rule that was passed over the opposition of a majority of the P5.  If the P5 wanted the NCAA to make any kind of change, the NCAA would instantly make that change.

So anything you see in the NCAA that you don't like, it's there because a majority of P5 schools like things the way they are.


January 8th, 2019 at 9:28 PM ^

In all fairness OSU's situation had nothing to do with poor treatment of players.  In fact, a whole slew of current and former players have given Meyer support and he appears for all intents and purposes, well liked by his players.  Granted, I think he has some character flaws, but most of his criticism is actually more towards supporting star players when do wrong rather than give them poor treatment.  It does however support the idea that he has far too much power to be able to cover stuff up.


January 9th, 2019 at 9:54 AM ^

Nothing really. He is right that Meyer was not the abuser but rather the enabler of the abuse. I think the troll comment comes from the fact that this poster joined today to defend Meyer and his user name translates to MGo fuck off. 

Those are pretty good signs that he is troll material. Otherwise, his post is correct.


January 9th, 2019 at 8:22 PM ^

Thanks for the support of the content.  I did re-join today, but not for this thread.  I have been a member since '08 and my account was deleted because I posted a thread that Yoder was reporting Washington to OSU.  I was not happy about it hence my new username.  

The Fan in Fargo

January 8th, 2019 at 9:38 PM ^

This was cool. I like this guy. I subscribed. So how is there not a lawyer in this country that can get some of these student athletes together and sue the shit out of the NCAA for negligence or something? I don't even know if negligence applies here but maybe there's a loophole somewhere. There should be an actual law against the abuse which would then justify being able to sue for negligence. Yeah I don't know what the hell I'm talking about but too many guys making way too much fucking money in the NCAA. Nothing new under the sun and nothing will be done.


January 9th, 2019 at 10:39 AM ^

Seems like the only way this changes is if the US Government decides to launch an investigation into the NCAA (like the FBI did with D1 basketball coaches). I'm thinking something along the lines of the Mitchell Report for steroids in baseball. The only way a semi-omniscient governing body is kept in check is either through its constituent members policing the institution (which is not going to happen because the P5 has a stake in hands off policies) or a higher body steps in to oversee the institution. However, there are a few cases that have taken this on (O'Bannon v. NCAA, Alston v. NCAA which is now in the court system) that also elicits changes, although not the ones we want.