Sports

Poll Finds 64 Percent of Americans Think College Players Should Share NCAA Revenue, NFL Players and Jon Stewart Agree

|

In the latest Reason-Rupe poll, 64 percent of Americans say college football and basketball players should receive a share of the money when universities and companies sell merchandise like their jerseys and video games featuring the players' likenesses. 

 "When I was in college, I know personally, as far as jersey sales and ticket sales, I helped make that university a lot of money," Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson said this week. "Johnny Manziel helped make Texas A&M so much money. You're talking about championship games that he was able to lead those guys to. You're talking about jersey sales that he don't see a dime of. I feel like as much money as universities make, I feel that some of that money should be given down to the players as well because we are the ones that are making this university money."

During the NCAA basketball tournament, UConn's Shabazz Napier, who ended up being named the tournament's most outstanding player, said there are nights he goes to bed hungry.  

"I just feel like a student-athlete, and sometimes, like I said, there's hungry nights and I'm not able to eat and I still got to play up to my capabilities. … When you see your jersey getting sold — it may not have your last name on it — but when you see your jersey getting sold and things like that, you feel like you want something in return," Napier said. 

The Reason-Rupe poll found 50 percent of Americans believe college basketball players should receive a share of the billions of dollars that CBS and Turner Sports are paying the NCAA to broadcast the basketball tournament. 

Last night on The Daily Show Jon Stewart highlighted Napier's hunger and the NCAA's hypocrisy:

Advertisement

NEXT: Uncle Sam Revives Feudal Practice to Collect From Children of Debtors

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. One hundred percent of my household thinks the Reason foundation should share their revenue by sending me a check every month. Since the NCAA’s money is up for public vote, shouldn’t Reason’s money be as well?

    Who cares what people think? If the players don’t like the deal, they should stop playing college sports and do something else. If they feel doing so is worth it because it gets them to the NFL or NBA, then they are getting a good deal out of it and no one should complain.

    1. Who cares what people think?

      I don’t know, but it is obviously someone on no one would bather taking polls.

      I don’t care if the players whine and complain and ask for money and I don’t care if the NCAA tells them to get stuffed. The NLRB getting involved is inappropriate (but when isn’t it?), but aside form that, so what? If they don’t like the deal, asking for a different deal seems like a reasonable thing to do.

      1. Woops. “or no one would bother”

      2. I actually don’t think the NLRB being involved is out of bounds in this scenario. The NW kids felt they were employees and as employees they have the right to unionize. Northwestern and the NCAA disagreed with that status, and the NLRB resolved that dispute following a hearing where both sides made their case. If you’re going to have an NLRB, resolving such a dispute seems like a primary reason for its existence.

    2. Who cares what people think? If the players don’t like the deal, they should stop playing college sports and do something else.

      I hate the NCAA and their current policies as much as anyone, but this is absolutely correct.

      If they feel doing so is worth it because it gets them to the NFL or NBA, then they are getting a good deal out of it and no one should complain.

      Oh really? If you feel that you’re paycheck and the ancillary benefits of your job are good but not quite enough than you have no right to complain? That’s ridiculous. These people do a lot to create revenue for their employers and have every right to demand a larger share of it.

      The NCAA also has every right to not change their compensation model, but their business is one that can be quite sensitive to PR disasters and if they were smart they’d actually listen to what their customers (assuming these are their customers) are telling them. It’s free market research.

      1. …”if they were smart they’d actually listen to what their customers (assuming these are their customers) are telling them. It’s free market research.”

        I’m sure they are and I’m sure this poll means absolutely nothing.
        Next year, when the kids get what they got this year, the ratings will be exactly the same, as will the cost of the TV time.
        This is hogwash; it’s at best ‘stated preference’ from the public. And if Stewart is serious, I’m sure he’ll show us the check where he paid the kids to add to his audience.

      2. Oh really? If you feel that you’re paycheck and the ancillary benefits of your job are good but not quite enough than you have no right to complain?

        I can do whatever I want. The job, however much I don’t like it, is by definition in my best interests at that pay or I wouldn’t take it. I can say I deserve more. That is a subjective statement. I cannot, however, say I am not better off for having the job because if I were not, I wouldn’t be working it.

        1. I cannot, however, say I am not better off for having the job because if I were not, I wouldn’t be working it.

          I don’t think anyone’s actually stating that. They agreed to a job for a certain compensation and, after having worked at it for a while, they feel they should either have received or be able to receive more compensation. Looking at it from the outside (and the inside, to an extent), I agree with them.

          Aside, the most logical solution to resolving any of these disputes is unionization and collective bargaining so long as the NCAA persists in treating each athlete as a commodity instead of an individual. Unions basically exist for situations like this.

          1. And the response would be the NCAA would just stop doing it. They don’t have the money to pay their athletes, especially since Title IX would require them to pay all of their athletes regardless of sport.

            It is funny you say “unions exist for situations like t his”. Yeah, they pretty much exist to cost people their jobs as employers find it too expensive to keep them.

            The other thing the NCAA could do would be just to hire scabs. There is a line of people waiting to get a full scholarship to Northwestern in return for playing football. No way would a union ever work unless the government came in and forced the colleges to bargain with it.

            1. Yeah, Title IX is a wrench in the works. What a shitty law the CRA is.

              It is funny you say “unions exist for situations like t his”. Yeah, they pretty much exist to cost people their jobs as employers find it too expensive to keep them.

              What I meant is situations where the employer has such outsized bargaining power over each individual employee and functions as a monopsony over that side’s labor. The only way for employees to gain an improvement in such a situation (absent state intervention or the unilateral action of the employer) is to unionize and collectively bargain. If the NCAA had a proper competitor I don’t think this would even be an issue.

              I don’t think the NCAA could get away with hiring scabs without suffering a huge hit in revenue, but I doubt it ever comes to that. Hell, I’m of the mind that the NCAA is eventually headed for a crack-up, with each power conference doing its own thing.

              1. Fucking squirrels ate my post.

                First, the NCAA wouldn’t lose money hiring scaps. They didn’t lose men’s basketball revenue when the players started going pro early and eventually out of high school. NCAA men’s basketball is of a much lower quality today than it was 30 years ago. Yet, they make more money. They don’t sell quality of play. They sell regional and tribal college loyalty. And that doesn’t depend on having the best players.

                The best demand that the Northwestern players have is that practice and conditioning time be limited so they can go to school. If you are a top high school player who has a chance to go to the NFL, are you going to go to the union school where your ability to work on football is limited or the non union one where you can work as hard as you want and they in fact will expect you to?

                I really wish they succeeded in forming a union just so I can see them break their old 44 game loosing streak record. It would be hysterical to watch the Union Northwestern team with their hours limits and working conditions rules go out and play an Ohio State or Nebraska team that had been busting its ass all summer to get ready for the season. It would be like if Toyota cars could somehow play a football game against GM ones. It would be spectacular.

              2. I don’t think the NCAA could get away with hiring scabs without suffering a huge hit in revenue,

                yeah no. college athletes, especially in football, are interchangeable.

      3. Who cares what people think? If the players don’t like the deal, they should stop playing college sports and do something else.

        How is this any less fallicious than the progtard “if you don’t like regulations, you should just stop running a business” argument?

        1. That is so stupid Stormy, I don’t know where to begin. First, the NCAA is not the govenrment. So, they have a right to determine how much their players make. To say that is the same as the regulation example, is to say we are all employees of the government. No we are not. The NCAA is a private operation that sets what amounts to a wage scale its members can pay people to play sports for them. The wage scale says payment in kind only. If that is not enough payment for you, don’t take the deal. Regulations are not pay.

          How do you even think is fallacious you fucking half wit? No one says you have to make a bargain with the NCAA. You can choose to play baseball and go straight to the pros. You can decide the whole thing is not worth it and not play sports at all.

          The fact that no one has started minor league basketball or football leagues such that you don’t have to go to the NCAA if you want to play in the NBA or NFL, is not the NCAA’s problem and does not obligate them to give college players any more compensation than they choose to do so and can find someone willing to accept.

          Your argument is like saying that since no one has opened a Burger King in town, McDonalds is obligated to pay their employees more as if they had competition for them. Ah, no they are not.

          1. “you fucking half wit?”

            That is not necessary, please.

            “The fact that no one has started minor league basketball or football leagues such that you don’t have to go to the NCAA if you want to play in the NBA or NFL,”

            NBADL? The old CBA is gone, thanks to Isaiah Thomas.

            1. Those leagues mostly failed. And they didn’t attract top talent. Even when the get paid option was available, players took the NCAA option. The only time they didn’t was when they could go to the NBA and make big money. The fact that the NBA won’t take them until they are 19 does not obligate the NCAA to pay them.

          2. None of the women’s football leagues have any non-poaching arrangement with NCAA.

    3. If nobody cares what people think, why do you comment?

  2. Is there no way to stop daily show embedded videos from playing automatically? It’s really annoying.

    1. This. Daily Show clips – you’re going to see it whether you want to or not.

    2. Mozilla + NoScript. I haven’t had to deal with an autoplay link in ages (not that there aren’t downsides).

  3. No.

    *stands astride tracks, holding back the train of ‘progress’*

    1. Also, what John said

  4. The most likely outcome will be a shared pool that goes to all student athletes to increase their per diem. I doubt anyone is going to agree to pay a handful of college players whose jerseys sell better than others. And if it’s video game likenesses, that would encompass all players anyway. And with Title IX, it’s gonna be shared across all sports.

    That said, there’s no good reason a college player shouldn’t be able to market his own material, such as a Johnny Football t-shirt, particularly one that doesn’t actually say Texas A&M anywhere on it.

    1. That said, there’s no good reason a college player shouldn’t be able to market his own material,

      Sure there is. They signed a contract in the form of a letter of intent that said they couldn’t. You could say the same thing about engineers or scientists who develop patents. There is no reason why they shouldn’t be able to work on the side and market their inventions. That is only if you think they can’t contract that right away.

      Manziel only has a name to market because he plays NCAA football. If the NCAA wants to say “we own the right to market your name” as a condition of playing in their organization, they can do that.

      That is just the NCAA driving a hard bargain and wanting to keep as much revenue as possible. Sucks for Manzel, but is totally within the NCAA’s rights.

      1. I said there was no good reason he shouldn’t be able to market himself and still play. I didn’t say it couldn’t be part of the contract. But why is it part of the contract. Even the NCAA isn’t bold enough to use someone’s name or potential trademark because they know they could be fought on it and probably lose. That’s why when they sell jerseys they don’t have any player’s name on it. But the NCAA should be willing to allow players the right to their own likeness and marketability because 1)it would make the public less likely to demand the NCAA give money to student-athletes if they could make their own and 2) it actually helps market the NCAA’s own product. If people see a Johnny Manziel t-shirt, that advertises him…and his games are NCAA sanctioned events. It’s basically free advertising.

        1. I think “because it was bargained that way” is good reason enough. Who am I to say that a deal I am not a part of is not a good one?

          1. It is sufficient reason, but I don’t know if that makes it good.

          2. The student-athletes are saying the deal is not good enough of one. Their current option is to play or not. I have no problem with them trying to get more than they currently get, even if they have to unionize to do so. I think unionization will impact them negatively, particularly in the manner of self-promotion that I think they should be allowed to have as individuals. That’s not something they should have to forfeit but they hold fewer cards than the NCAA.

            Manziel would have done it if he could have and maintained his eligibility. Hell, he practically did it with selling his autographs because he knew the NCAA benefits from him being on the field more than they lost by him selling his signature. He didn’t need the money like a lot of them do. He did it because he was able to. If they kicked him out he’s a guy that could have played in Canada for a year. That’s not an option for everyone.

            1. The student-athletes are saying the deal is not good enough of one.

              most of them aren’t, otherwise there wouldn’t be staggering demand for a miniscule supply.

            2. What Tone police said. If it is not good enough, they shouldn’t do it. Yes, if you don’t like your pay, your only option is to find another job. Welcome to the real world.

              1. So no one should try to get more from their employer, especially when their employer is the only game in town for their skills? Why? Would you begrudge them for getting more than they get now if they’re able to come to an agreement with the NCAA for better benefits? If so, why?

        2. It’s part f the contract because there’s nothing else keeping a Kentucky booster from saying “if you come to UK, I’ll sign you to a personal appearance contract for $10k a visit to my house” while smaller schools won’t be able t match it. And I think the NCAA says they want programs on equal footing when it comes to recruitment and operation of their member schools.

          I’m not saying its right, but there’s a reason t disallow t under the current NCAA rules.

          1. I’ll sign you to a personal appearance contract for $10k a visit to my house” while smaller schools won’t be able t match it.

            No stupidly rich people with an insane devotion to their alma mater ever go to mid-majors? If Papa John wants to pay the next Wiggins $200k to come to Ball State then why should I get in his way?

            And I think the NCAA says they want programs on equal footing when it comes to recruitment and operation of their member schools.

            And yet, they’re not. It’s like campaign finance restrictions; all of the NCAA’s various compliance bullshit basically serves to protect the big schools. The Pony Express SMU teams should have been a blueprint instead of a cautionary tale.

      2. but is totally within the NCAA’s rights.

        The NCAA is a government supported cartel. It’s as private as Obamacare. There are numerous state schools that are members and government funded student loans provide a money flow to them all. If the NCAA was totally private, and the schools in question not living off of coerced money I might agree with this. But it’s not, and they are not.

        1. Kids are still free to go to NAIA schols, aren’t they?

          1. Which changes nothing about how the NCAA and those schools operate or obtain funding.

            1. no school is obligated to be in the NCAA either. many schools aren’t. Your point here is that because one-drop of government money comes into one institution, that taints the entire NCAA. Horsehit.

              1. One Drop? Seriously?

                1. BTW, I think most of this from the student athletes is utter bullshit given that they are being granted the opportunity to get a degree in exchange for their play. That said the restrictions on marketing one’s self for additional income and likeness being used are utter bullshit for an organization so heavily supported by taxpayer monies.

                  I’m totally fine with contracts that would mimic the effects of what is currently in place provided the government is not placing it’s finger on one side of the scale making forming or marketing competing organizations difficult to impossible.

        2. The NCAA is a government supported cartel.

          Specious bullshit.

          here are numerous state schools that are members and government funded student loans provide a money flow to them all.

          So what? The fact that these public schools chose to join the NCAA does not mean the NCAA is somehow “government supported”. Would you call college pizza places “government supported enterprises” because they serve public colleges?

        3. The NCAA is a government supported cartel.

          How is it government supported? There is nothing stopping people from starting minor leagues to compete with it. Indeed, they have in baseball and as a result the top baseball players don’t play college ball. If someone wants to start a minor league football league to pay players and compete with the NCAA, they can.

          They haven’t because the market won’t support one. The NFL has no reason to subsidize it. And the fans root for laundry and it would take years to get them to stop watching the NCAA in sufficient numbers.

          That sucks for the players. But sometimes markets work like that.

          If you are so upset about the NCAA being a “cartel”, what do you plan to do about it? The only thing I can see is have the government come in and file an antitrust suit against them and essentially have DOJ and the Courts run college football. Do you think that is a good idea? I don’t.

          I just don’t get people’s obsession with this.

  5. said there are nights he goes to bed hungry.

    Please stop. There are places in the world where it is quite possible to starve. America is not one of those places. In America poor people are too fat and food banks routinely throw away food. When someone talks about going hungry in this country all I hear is “I am too lazy/stupid/entitled to properly feed myself and shouldn’t be trusted with sharp implements.”

    You’ve got a good case for being paid on the merits. Stop the cry-me-a-river emotional blackmail bullshit.

    1. It’s like the “1 in 6 Americans are food insecure” bullshit.

      And come on, your athletic scholarship didn’t come with a mean plan? Give me a break.

    2. Athletes tend to have access to kick ass dining facilities, and room and board are covered so they can eat as much as they want. When they are bulking up they are encouraged to eat more than that. So I’m not sure how he could be going to bed hungry.

      1. So I’m not sure how he could be going to bed hungry.

        I suppose he could literally be too stupid to feed himself, but he’s probably just lying.

        1. If he is too stupid to feed himself, and he is losing weight or his performance is suffering, I am quite confident that his coaches would feed him by hand.

      2. So I’m not sure how he could be going to bed hungry.

        According to another interview with him, the campus cafeterias are all closed by 10pm, so after that he would “go hungry” because he couldn’t afford to order a pizza. He currently gets all-he-can-eat 3 meals per day, plus a $550 meal card for use during the year at campus snack bars. But beyond that, he’s probably starving.

        1. Yeah, I sometimes went to be hungry in college too because I forgot to stock up on snacks.

    3. I have my doubts about that comment too – unless he gets real hungry between his free dinner in the dining hall and bedtime.

      I went to USC – they fed the football “student athletes” quite well, including Thursday night barbecues with massive steaks.

  6. and Jon Stewart Agree

    JOHN STEWART! THEN WE MUST DO IT!

  7. Economics 101:

    A Company exists solely for the purpose of generating PROFITS for the owners or shareholders. A company does not exist for the good or best interest of the workers, customers, or citizens within the jurisdiction which the company operates.

    1. “A Company exists solely for the purpose of generating PROFITS for the owners or shareholders”

      This is true, but given your general ignorance and mendacity, I’m sure you really don’t know what your mean.
      Please tell us what “company” is profiting and how.

      1. Actually his mistake is in not realizing that those profits are an indicator of the ‘good’ the company creates.

        It comes down to that whole ‘voluntary transaction’ thing – if the company doesn’t offer you a good or service at a price where an exchange is a net benefit to you, you just don’t do the exchange.

        And its not the companies responsibility to look out for its employees’ best interests – its kinda taken as an axiom here that the best person to look out for you interests is *you*.

        A way to tell if the employees and customers think the company is serving their best interests? Is the company making a profit and are the employees continuing to be employees?

        1. “Actually his mistake is in not realizing that those profits are an indicator of the ‘good’ the company creates.”

          I was gonna give Alice a bit more rope before I tightened the knot.

    2. Well in this case the Company is a public university and the shareholders are taxpayers, so where’s my cut?

      1. Actually, n this case Northwesternnis a private school and the NLRB even took pains to say the ruling applies only to private schools.

        -Pedant

        1. Damn it sloop, don’t mess up my rants with silly things like facts!

      2. If you want to cut off the state colleges, have fun. Of course that doesn’t say anything about the private colleges. Northwestern is a private college. Who the hell are you or me to tell them they have to pay their players?

        1. Calm down and pull the stick out of your ass John.

  8. Give them 10% of number related merchandising. Use proceeds to first pay back scholarship (tuition, room and board, books, tudors), medical isurance incuding million dollar injury liability. Whatever is left goes into a trust fund that he will receive when and if he graduates with a four year degree. Any forfieted amounts go into a fund to provid a small stipend for stundent atheletes to bu pizza a beer with. Sounds like a win win to me. Of course the lwyers I’m sure will screw it up all to hell.

    1. The problem is if you give them free tudors, next thing you know, they will be demanding windsors as well.

      1. But no Yorks are permitted.

  9. “I don’t feel student-athletes should get hundreds of thousands of dollars, but like I said, there are hungry nights that I go to bed and I’m starving,” Napier said to reporters.”

    I’m calling bullshit; if he’s hungry, it’s because he chose not to eat.
    Ooops. I see D-w-T beat me to it

    1. This shit really pisses me off on a personal level. I was homeless as a teenager (from 14-18) and, being a kid, it took me a little while to figure out how to obtain food regularly. I would work for food, a stunning number of people will just outright feed you if you tell them your circumstances, and food banks are available in any town of any size with at least one church, or at least the church will help you.

      I guess what I’m saying is that I find it fucking impossible for someone with the kind of profile and support that this guy has as someone who is even slightly challenged in obtaining food. If nothing else a “Hey, coach, I’m hungry and I’ll be useless for the next game if I don’t get some food.” would yield instant results.

      Fuck this guy.

      1. See above. There are these things called dining halls. All colleges have them. Student athletes get to eat at them. That’s really all you need to know to call his statement BS.

      2. “If nothing else a “Hey, coach, I’m hungry and I’ll be useless for the next game if I don’t get some food.” would yield instant results.”

        I’ll bet the results would be the coach laughing in his face; ‘How can you be hungry after that meal we put on the table for you?’

  10. They should make it like American Idol so that when a player gets the amount of money they want after the audience votes the player will enter the game. Each vote, of course pays the player, costing x amount from the voter..wait…that’s MY FUCKING IDEA..copyright, patent pending, trademark

    1. It will be like having a Fantasy team…except you have as much control over who playes on your team as you want to spend on it. Want to see LeBron check in? Pick up the phone and vote now!

  11. Poll Also Finds NCAA Thinks 64% of Americans Can Go Fuck Themselves If They Think They’re Changing a Goddamn Thing

    1. Even more accurate:

      64 Percent of Americans Think College Players Should Share NCAA Revenue, But 100 Percent Are Still Going To Watch And Attend All NCAA Events Anyways”

  12. Even at the football factories, only a handful of the players make it to the pros.

    We’re talking about the handful of players that think they’re getting fucked by the system and want to change the rules so that the vast majority of scholarship players will get fucked in the future.

  13. Suppose the NW players unionize, and then make a few demands to the university. Won’t the University just tell them, “Sorry, we’d love to give you that stipend but it’s against NCAA rules.”

    Since, I assume, universities are giving their football and basketball players everything they can (and then some) within the rules, isn’t the players’ problem really with the NCAA?

    I don’t see what the players gain by unionizing at the school level. I would think that they would have to unionize nationally to get rule changes from the NCAA.

    Can anyone think of something that the university could give the players that they aren’t already getting (that is also allowed within the NCAA rules)?

    1. As an added buns, when the school is telling the players it is against NCAA rules, they can take the opportunity to hand the player their annual 1099 form showing that they received $60k that year in compensation and that the owe taxes on it.

      That union would last about a week in the real world.

    2. I don’t see how the NCAA rules would be a defense for an employer failing to properly compensate his employee.

      Now, if you’re saying as a negotiating tactic the School will just say “sorry..etc.”, then yes I agree.

  14. You have no expectation of being able to get on an airplane without being subjected to a cavity search, because ROWBOATS!

  15. I keep hearing that athletes are compensated with a college education.
    Many of the players interviewed during the March Madness weren’t able to string together a coherent sentence. Several, I noted, were even
    Communication majors. I suppose there’s a few Bill Bradleys scholar/athletes left, but the run of the mill athlete is sadly lacking.

    1. I don’t think there are any NCAA rules requiring them to take advantage of the opportunity.

      1. Stop. These kids are put in stupid classes to stay eligible.

        The ‘they’re compensated with an education’ argument is horseshit.

        I said it in another thread, have you ever seen the 30 for 30 “Broke”? If these guys actually got an education you would have these issues. Not at this level anyway. What’s the number, like 75% of NFL guys are broke in 5 years?

    2. Many of the players interviewed during the March Madness weren’t able to string together a coherent sentence.

      Kevin Ollie has mastered the art of the verb-less sentence. You expect players to do better?

  16. wait until the athletes find out what the union, Title IX, the gender pay equalists, and all the other mooches want.

  17. HEY REASON, KILL THE FUCKING AUTOPLAY ON THE FUCKING VIDEO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  18. My biggest beef is with the the stupid NCAA rules. I’d like to hear one of these clowns justify why it’s OK for them to put draconian restrictions on athletes and coaches that a math or computer science or engineering department would never dream of implementing. If an undergraduate gets a paid internship at Google we brag about it on the web site. If something like that happens in the athletic department, the coach gets fired, the kid gets kicked out of the program, and the program is cut. You can argue about whether the athletes get a fair deal. (I think that almost all of them get an excellent deal.) But the clearest injustice is that they can’t make deals on their own like every other student in the university.

    1. Right. I can make money off my image and likeness…but if I could dunk, I couldn’t? There’s no riders attached to academic scholarships like this.

  19. Our local newspaper did a bit on some of the absurdities within the NCAA violations rule at my university. One student had an unlimited meal plan…which allows unlimited swipes at campus dining halls. However, NCAA rules limit you to “three meals a day” which is interpreted as “three swipes a day.” Since he would pick up a snack or a Coke or something, and thus go over the swipe limit which applied only to NCAA athletes, not the general student body, both of which could have the same plan. He had to pay back something like $90 or whatever they determined the value was.

  20. Nobody give a yippie skippin flippie what Jon Stewart think but Alexis is hot so she get a pass.

  21. Johnny Manziel helped make Texas A&M so much money. You’re talking about championship games that he was able to lead those guys to.

    AP is… well, he’s not smart.

  22. Alexis.

    NO MORE AUTOPLAYING VIDEOS!

    Do you have any idea how annoying it is to have that video start over every time I open H&R? And you did it on a Friday, which means it won’t drop into the archives till Monday.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.