goemaw.com
TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: Katpappy on January 30, 2014, 07:10:02 PM
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.bleacherreport.net%2Fimg%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2F002%2F730%2F732%2Fhi-res-5f7826824c4defb61c43aab59222dbc9_crop_north.%3Fw%3D630%26amp%3Bh%3D420%26amp%3Bq%3D75&hash=b4f90164b68a6d4a3a5142a46525d7dea6f1db31)
With all the talk of unionization, should college athletes get paid?
JUMP INTO THE DEBATE AND HAVE YOUR SAY.
Disagree with a comment? Reply and voice your opinion. Happy Debating!
-
interesting you decided this thread to post this in.
-
This will make or break schools before it's over.
-
The rough life of a scholarship athlete :Chirp:
-
The rough life of a scholarship athlete :Chirp:
I've been waiting forever for this, are we gonna do it?
-
The rough life of a scholarship athlete :Chirp:
I've been waiting forever for this, are we gonna do it?
i'm game
-
:ohno:
-
The rough life of a scholarship athlete :Chirp:
I've been waiting forever for this, are we gonna do it?
i'm game
This is a counter punch argument for me. I'm gonna Floyd Mayweather the crap outta this.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
i'm lazy.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
Are there any stats about NCAA scholarship athletes getting out of college with significant debt? Like, if the Scholly and stipend don't cover it all, it would seem reasonable to assume some of these guys are ending up in debt
-
Quote from moron:
"No, most schools cant afford to pay all of their athletes, maybe some top tier schools and thats it. Then high school players will all want to flock to these top tier schools, ruining college sports. It is not slavery, not even a close comparison. They get free education which can cost upwards of 50 grand a year."
Is he trying to say "BCS schools"? This is why there will be another level for the schools that can pay this. We know any school paying coaches and staff millions can very easily have some kind of support for the athletes.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
Are there any stats about NCAA scholarship athletes getting out of college with significant debt? Like, if the Scholly and stipend don't cover it all, it would seem reasonable to assume some of these guys are ending up in debt
You seriously think college athletes don't take out loans? You're trolling right? Do you think college athletes don't eat and pay rent and bills?
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
Are there any stats about NCAA scholarship athletes getting out of college with significant debt? Like, if the Scholly and stipend don't cover it all, it would seem reasonable to assume some of these guys are ending up in debt
You seriously think college athletes don't take out loans? You're trolling right? Do you think college athletes don't eat and pay rent and bills?
didn't say that. wondered if there were stats. like if there was a stat "The average NCAA scholarship athlete leaves school with 40k in debt" I'd be swayed to pay athletes pretty easily.
-
Quote from moron:
"No, most schools cant afford to pay all of their athletes, maybe some top tier schools and thats it. Then high school players will all want to flock to these top tier schools, ruining college sports. It is not slavery, not even a close comparison. They get free education which can cost upwards of 50 grand a year."
Is he trying to say "BCS schools"? This is why there will be another level for the schools that can pay this. We know any school paying coaches and staff millions can very easily have some kind of support for the athletes.
The bolded part of that quote I agree with, and I'm assuming he means most schools. Do you have any idea how many athletes are at BCS schools? The answer is a lot. Its not that the schools can't afford it, but they can't afford it the way most schools spend money currently.
The non bolded part of that quote is rough ridin' absurd.
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
-
Quote from moron:
"No, most schools cant afford to pay all of their athletes, maybe some top tier schools and thats it. Then high school players will all want to flock to these top tier schools, ruining college sports. It is not slavery, not even a close comparison. They get free education which can cost upwards of 50 grand a year."
Is he trying to say "BCS schools"? This is why there will be another level for the schools that can pay this. We know any school paying coaches and staff millions can very easily have some kind of support for the athletes.
The bolded part of that quote I agree with, and I'm assuming he means most schools. Do you have any idea how many athletes are at BCS schools? The answer is a lot. Its not that the schools can't afford it, but they can't afford it the way most schools spend money currently.
The non bolded part of that quote is rough ridin' absurd.
True. I'm basically pointing out that there will be a separate division of schools if this union gets what they want. Pay for play.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
Isn't that the way it is now. Hell we're doing it.
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
If that's true, then I'm all for an increased financial stipend.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
Isn't that the way it is now. Hell we're doing it.
Not really.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
That'd be a better way to do it, definitely caters to the bigger fanbases, so still creates some inequality...but I do want kids to be paid commensurately for what they're worth.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
What if the kid can only make money from signatures, appearances, games during the time he's in college. Most of them don't make it to the next level.
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
Isn't that the way it is now. Hell we're doing it.
Not really.
WSC, Training Table, Vanier II... do I need to go on.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
That'd be a better way to do it, definitely caters to the bigger fanbases, so still creates some inequality...but I do want kids to be paid commensurately for what they're worth.
The current system already favors bigger fanbases.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
That'd be a better way to do it, definitely caters to the bigger fanbases, so still creates some inequality...but I do want kids to be paid commensurately for what they're worth.
The current system already favors bigger fanbases.
Yes, why else do the schools spent millions for athletic amenities. Better recruits and bigger fanbases.
-
another quote:
"Being able to throw your future and scholarship away over pot or raping a girl is freedom too? Which is why they aren't mature enough yet to handle being paid on top of a free education!"
-
another quote:
"Being able to throw your future and scholarship away over pot or raping a girl is freedom too? Which is why they aren't mature enough yet to handle being paid on top of a free education!"
Who said that?
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
-
another quote:
"Being able to throw your future and scholarship away over pot or raping a girl is freedom too? Which is why they aren't mature enough yet to handle being paid on top of a free education!"
Who said that?
Someone who shouldn't have the privilege of breathing the same air as most of us.
-
So, give the kids a bigger stipend, and college football stays the way it is. Start changing crap like getting paid for likeness or paying better rceruits more money and crap, college football ceases to exist on a level playing field. Not saying which one is right or wrong, but there would be a big shift.
I think athletes should get a cut of their likeness but not get it until they have exhausted their eligibility
What if the kid can only make money from signatures, appearances, games during the time he's in college. Most of them don't make it to the next level.
not sure what you mean here
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
I shouldn't have used the word assumption there, what I posted is what I knew about athletes that I knew when I was in school. Also you made several good points in your counter argument that swayed my opinion, nice job.
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
I shouldn't have used the word assumption there, what I posted is what I knew about athletes that I knew when I was in school. Also you made several good points in your counter argument that swayed my opinion, nice job.
i started to type something snarky and then stopped. do you or did you know 19 year olds at kstate that didn't receive parental support and weren't on some kind of scholarship but were still full time students?
-
Any scenario in which full ride athletic scholarship kids think they're screwed is dumb. They can take out loans like the rest of us who lived outside our means in college and didn't have academic scholarships, grants, or parents money. Otherwise go play euroball or amateur football where you don't get glory, fame, coeds, excellent coaching and strength trainning. Oh and a free education, because you probably aren't going pro anyway.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
I shouldn't have used the word assumption there, what I posted is what I knew about athletes that I knew when I was in school. Also you made several good points in your counter argument that swayed my opinion, nice job.
i started to type something snarky and then stopped. do you or did you know 19 year olds at kstate that didn't receive parental support and weren't on some kind of scholarship but were still full time students?
Yeah and they all had jobs that paid them real money, unlike the athletes I knew who got paid in sweatpants, t shirts, and backpacks. Those things are hard to eat they also don't work well in gas tanks or for cell phone bill payments.
-
Any scenario in which full ride athletic scholarship kids think they're screwed is dumb. They can take out loans like the rest of us who lived outside our means in college and didn't have academic scholarships, grants, or parents money. Otherwise go play euroball or amateur football where you don't get glory, fame, coeds, excellent coaching and strength trainning. Oh and a free education, because you probably aren't going pro anyway.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
You not being exceptional at all has no place in this conversation
-
Any scenario in which full ride athletic scholarship kids think they're screwed is dumb. They can take out loans like the rest of us who lived outside our means in college and didn't have academic scholarships, grants, or parents money. Otherwise go play euroball or amateur football where you don't get glory, fame, coeds, excellent coaching and strength trainning. Oh and a free education, because you probably aren't going pro anyway.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
"coeds"
oh boy
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
I shouldn't have used the word assumption there, what I posted is what I knew about athletes that I knew when I was in school. Also you made several good points in your counter argument that swayed my opinion, nice job.
i started to type something snarky and then stopped. do you or did you know 19 year olds at kstate that didn't receive parental support and weren't on some kind of scholarship but were still full time students?
Yeah and they all had jobs that paid them real money, unlike the athletes I knew who got paid in sweatpants, t shirts, and backpacks. Those things are hard to eat they also don't work well in gas tanks or for cell phone bill payments.
what kind of grants did these people that you used to know get?
-
Question for you, MakeItRain: If you pay football/basketball players, do you pay rowers, cross country runners, etc? If no, how could you justify paying athletes of one or two sports and not the others?
-
:popcorn:
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
-
Any scenario in which full ride athletic scholarship kids think they're screwed is dumb. They can take out loans like the rest of us who lived outside our means in college and didn't have academic scholarships, grants, or parents money. Otherwise go play euroball or amateur football where you don't get glory, fame, coeds, excellent coaching and strength trainning. Oh and a free education, because you probably aren't going pro anyway.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
You not being exceptional at all has no place in this conversation
Substitute majority of college students for rest of us. Happy?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
Question for you, MakeItRain: If you pay football/basketball players, do you pay rowers, cross country runners, etc? If no, how could you justify paying athletes of one or two sports and not the others?
I love Olympic sports, like a whole lot. All athletes should receive a stipend. Olympic sports athletes get screwed over worse than basketball and football players do. They have to do all of the work but most have partial scholarships, they work their asses off for their schools and I take it personally when they get disrespected.
-
Any scenario in which full ride athletic scholarship kids think they're screwed is dumb. They can take out loans like the rest of us who lived outside our means in college and didn't have academic scholarships, grants, or parents money. Otherwise go play euroball or amateur football where you don't get glory, fame, coeds, excellent coaching and strength trainning. Oh and a free education, because you probably aren't going pro anyway.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
You not being exceptional at all has no place in this conversation
Substitute majority of college students for rest of us. Happy?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
relevance?
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
eff. i didn't know that i was going to have to do this, but here is the point...
in order to get a pell grant, you can't take money from your rough ridin' parents. that is like student financial aid 101. at least it was when we (you and i) were in school. you basically had to divorce you parents and they could not claim you on their taxes and all parties had to agree that they would not give you any money period. so your initial point that people could get loans and grants and supplemental money from their parents is incorrect. it's false. it's wrong. unless of course you meant something else which i'm not able to figure out because you haven't answered a single question i've asked.
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
eff. i didn't know that i was going to have to do this, but here is the point...
in order to get a pell grant, you can't take money from your rough ridin' parents. that is like student financial aid 101. at least it was when we (you and i) were in school. you basically had to divorce you parents and they could not claim you on their taxes and all parties had to agree that they would not give you any money period. so your initial point that people could get loans and grants and supplemental money from their parents is incorrect. it's false. it's wrong. unless of course you meant something else which i'm not able to figure out because you haven't answered a single question i've asked.
You can't even divorce your parents anymore. They could disown you, and as long as they have money then you will not get pell grants or good loans. My parents stopped paying for my schooling (admittedly my fault), but they have tons of money, and I had to take several years off of school (because I couldn't get loans). It was not until I was 24 that I was able to get loans again, because only then was I technically not a dependent according to the government. It's a shitty situation if your parents have money and they aren't flipping the bill for school.
-
I agree about non full ride athletes getting a worse deal, but, why even play if you are getting screwed?
What does it benefit the school that you play golf and generate no revenue?
Instead a golfer could get a membership at a golf course, hire a personal coach and get better without college. Or a golfer could accept a partial scholarship, get free golf and free coaching and free training, along with academic help for a degree, in case they don't make the pga.
I respect the hard work they do, but they choose to participate. Doesn't seem so bad?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
eff. i didn't know that i was going to have to do this, but here is the point...
in order to get a pell grant, you can't take money from your rough ridin' parents. that is like student financial aid 101. at least it was when we (you and i) were in school. you basically had to divorce you parents and they could not claim you on their taxes and all parties had to agree that they would not give you any money period. so your initial point that people could get loans and grants and supplemental money from their parents is incorrect. it's false. it's wrong. unless of course you meant something else which i'm not able to figure out because you haven't answered a single question i've asked.
You can't even divorce your parents anymore. They could disown you, and as long as they have money then you will not get pell grants or good loans. My parents stopped paying for my schooling (admittedly my fault), but they have tons of money, and I had to take several years off of school (because I couldn't get loans). It was not until I was 24 that I was able to get loans again, because only then was I technically not a dependent according to the government. It's a shitty situation if your parents have money and they aren't flipping the bill for school.
yeah. it has to be a mutual thing where you both agree to it. at least it used to be that way. either way, you are both agreeing that they won't give you a penny. you have to be ruled an "independant".
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
eff. i didn't know that i was going to have to do this, but here is the point...
in order to get a pell grant, you can't take money from your rough ridin' parents. that is like student financial aid 101. at least it was when we (you and i) were in school. you basically had to divorce you parents and they could not claim you on their taxes and all parties had to agree that they would not give you any money period. so your initial point that people could get loans and grants and supplemental money from their parents is incorrect. it's false. it's wrong. unless of course you meant something else which i'm not able to figure out because you haven't answered a single question i've asked.
1. I answered every question you asked, were you looking for specific answers?
2. That actually isn't what I said, did you miss "and or?" That sentence and how it was written or how it is interpreted has nothing to do with the point that most athletes can't get jobs to make money like non athletes can, so why have I been asked to answer 49 questions about it?
3. Your impression about how the pell grant worked is absolutely and 100% wrong. There is no provision about your parents not supporting you to make you eligible for a pell grant. I'm not assuming this or guessing it based on my experience; I know this based on my first work study being in a financial aid office and at one time in my life having a job where I assisted kids in filling out a fasfa. Essentially there was/is a formula and percentage of how much money your family income is as it relates to your family size that determines what aid you are eligible for and how much you get. Obviously if you don't list your parents income on your fasfa you are more likely to get full benefits, but it is absolutely possible to list your parents on your fasfa and still receive full aide. In my case I listed my parents as a freshman and a sophomore and I still received full aid, they obviously didn't have enough money but they had enough where they paid my liability insurance on my car. With the job I had helping kids fill out their fasfa, among other things, the most difficult thing I had to do was get the parents to complete their tax info. We used parental info for everyone I helped but only one wasn't eligible for full aid, his parents won $50,000 in the lottery but didn't tell him.
Bottom line is that your parents can have income and you can still get aid, that's a 100% fact. Obviously if your parents are making $60,000 dollars a year you aren't getting the full pell, but I never said that. I think you read way more into "parental support" than I said or meant.
-
I'm not in everyone's pocket, but I'm assuming that if they got loans they filled out a fasfa and qualified for pell grants they accepted the pell. Are you going to get to the point, its getting late man?
eff. i didn't know that i was going to have to do this, but here is the point...
in order to get a pell grant, you can't take money from your rough ridin' parents. that is like student financial aid 101. at least it was when we (you and i) were in school. you basically had to divorce you parents and they could not claim you on their taxes and all parties had to agree that they would not give you any money period. so your initial point that people could get loans and grants and supplemental money from their parents is incorrect. it's false. it's wrong. unless of course you meant something else which i'm not able to figure out because you haven't answered a single question i've asked.
You can't even divorce your parents anymore. They could disown you, and as long as they have money then you will not get pell grants or good loans. My parents stopped paying for my schooling (admittedly my fault), but they have tons of money, and I had to take several years off of school (because I couldn't get loans). It was not until I was 24 that I was able to get loans again, because only then was I technically not a dependent according to the government. It's a shitty situation if your parents have money and they aren't flipping the bill for school.
yeah. it has to be a mutual thing where you both agree to it. at least it used to be that way. either way, you are both agreeing that they won't give you a penny. you have to be ruled an "independant".
Daris, that's an oversimplification. I have no idea what deuce's exact situation was and I don't want to know because that's personal, but the process isn't as black and white and simplistic as you are making it out to be. Its obviously fraud if you get a pell grant and then your parents are paying your tuition or paying your rent, but there is no provision preventing your parents from giving you a few bucks for food.
Again I'm confused as to why we're talking about this though
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg46.imageshack.us%2Fimg46%2F4823%2Fjumptheshark.png&hash=e22d6b00e5c21a06183680b8d9c0e46c9f3728fc)
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg46.imageshack.us%2Fimg46%2F4823%2Fjumptheshark.png&hash=e22d6b00e5c21a06183680b8d9c0e46c9f3728fc)
Agree, I'd much rather talk about people who expect athletes to do everything possible to win for the school, pass all of their classes, and then go and wait tables for 20 hours a week. I'm also intrigued by people who don't understand that schools provide trainers and food for completely self-serving purposes.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg46.imageshack.us%2Fimg46%2F4823%2Fjumptheshark.png&hash=e22d6b00e5c21a06183680b8d9c0e46c9f3728fc)
Agree, I'd much rather talk about people who expect athletes to do everything possible to win for the school, pass all of their classes, and then go and wait tables for 20 hours a week. I'm also intrigued by people who don't understand that schools provide trainers and food for completely self-serving purposes.
I wasn't trying to take sides at all. Sorry if it came off that way. It just seems like the whole conversation went completely off the tracks.
-
i agree and apologize for messing up the thread for the last two pages. cliffs notes-
-mir is wrong in thinking that poor scholarship athletes and poor non scholarship athletes share similar money and student loan problems after college because of financial options available to them while in school.
-nothing. that was basically it.
-
i agree and apologize for messing up the thread for the last two pages. cliffs notes-
-mir is wrong in thinking that poor scholarship athletes and poor non scholarship athletes share similar money and student loan problems after college because of financial options available to them while in school.
-nothing. that was basically it.
So no opinion on whether or not athletes should receive a stipend?
I know of 6 DOD football players and one basketball player at the same time, 3 of the football players and the basketball player is known by every single poster on this board and I know for an absolute fact that they had, at least for a year, a similar debt load that I had. I don't want to seem like all of these guys were starving or even worse off than me but they certainly weren't better off than me. I think most people think athletes live better than their peers and for the most part that isn't true.
-
i agree and apologize for messing up the thread for the last two pages. cliffs notes-
-mir is wrong in thinking that poor scholarship athletes and poor non scholarship athletes share similar money and student loan problems after college because of financial options available to them while in school.
-nothing. that was basically it.
So no opinion on whether or not athletes should receive a stipend?
I know of 6 DOD football players and one basketball player at the same time, 3 of the football players and the basketball player is known by every single poster on this board and I know for an absolute fact that they had, at least for a year, a similar debt load that I had. I don't want to seem like all of these guys were starving or even worse off than me but they certainly weren't better off than me. I think most people think athletes live better than their peers and for the most part that isn't true.
i absolutely think athletes should get more than what they currently get. without a doubt.
-
:cheers:
-
I would assume the debt load of a student athlete is similar to that of a non athlete with a similar socioeconomic background. A non student athlete would get grants and loans to cover school expenses and some cost of living and then supplement that with jobs and or parrental support. A student athlete with a full ride (most student athletes don‘t get a full ride) will use the grants and loans to fully supplement cost of living since a job isn't a credible option for most.
no
yep
no. your assumptions are way rough ridin' wrong. at least they were when i was in school and i "assume" they still are.
I shouldn't have used the word assumption there, what I posted is what I knew about athletes that I knew when I was in school. Also you made several good points in your counter argument that swayed my opinion, nice job.
i started to type something snarky and then stopped. do you or did you know 19 year olds at kstate that didn't receive parental support and weren't on some kind of scholarship but were still full time students?
Yeah and they all had jobs that paid them real money, unlike the athletes I knew who got paid in sweatpants, t shirts, and backpacks. Those things are hard to eat they also don't work well in gas tanks or for cell phone bill payments.
Don't forget cleats, practice shorts, etc. and other items easily sold
-
Its a NCAA violation for athletes to sell that stuff, clown. Even if they could do you really think they have enough of that stuff to make good money off of it. There aren't that many weirdos that wants to buy used practice gear, gross.
-
I think every school should be required to provide books and tuition, and make available student-athlete housing including a meal plan that costs less than the stipend.
I don't agree with the idea that athletes should be paid salaries based upon skill level or anything like that, though.
-
The reality is that these "student-athletes" are working full time jobs for the University. Question is whether they should get some spending money for their services. Sure, they get great benefits like free education, housing, meal plans, health benefits, athletic gear. No question. They are similarly situated with the elite academic performers who are on full rides and get free housing. The difference is that the elite academic performers can work part time jobs to earn spending money on the side. In fact, these students are often employed by the Univeristy, earning money as teaching assistants, graduate assistants, tutors, etc. Yes, like the athletes, these academic performers already have great benefits, but none of those benefits translate into $$-in-hand for weekend spending, going on dates, going out to dinner, buying clothes, xbos games, etc. Unless the athlete has parents providing them money, they have no access to funds, basically.
I think their athletic work load should be compensated in some form, however small.
-
:clap:
-
Saw 3 new pages and got all scared/excited that something big had happened...but nope, just some people talking about financial aid for college students in the Conference realignment thread.
-
Saw 3 new pages and got all scared/excited that something big had happened...but nope, just some people talking about financial aid for college students in the Conference realignment thread.
Yea...it deserved its own thread.
-
The reality is that these "student-athletes" are working full time jobs for the University. Question is whether they should get some spending money for their services. Sure, they get great benefits like free education, housing, meal plans, health benefits, athletic gear. No question. They are similarly situated with the elite academic performers who are on full rides and get free housing. The difference is that the elite academic performers can work part time jobs to earn spending money on the side. In fact, these students are often employed by the Univeristy, earning money as teaching assistants, graduate assistants, tutors, etc. Yes, like the athletes, these academic performers already have great benefits, but none of those benefits translate into $$-in-hand for weekend spending, going on dates, going out to dinner, buying clothes, xbos games, etc. Unless the athlete has parents providing them money, they have no access to funds, basically.
I think their athletic work load should be compensated in some form, however small.
i'm all for athletes getting a little more, but to say they have no access to funds is either ignorant or a lie. financial aid is available to them just as it is for everyone else. pell grants if they qualify and if their parents are not helping them out they will and loans if they don't or if they decide they want more.
-
Athletes get a pretty sweet deal IMO. Would take, personally.
the money is nice... but it's such a huge time commitment
so what
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
the chix tho
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
-
what precisely would people like to see? I really have no problem with student athletes being fairly compensated but I think it would be so difficult to put a price on that. and if they were paid for play it could be detrimental to the schools and the game.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
another quote:
"Being able to throw your future and scholarship away over pot or raping a girl is freedom too? Which is why they aren't mature enough yet to handle being paid on top of a free education!"
Who said that?
Someone who shouldn't have the privilege of breathing the same air as most of us.
just opened this thread I really hope the rest is a lot if the same
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
why can't they go to the nfl or nba straight out of high school?
-
The assumption that S-A's don't have part time jobs is false. Many have summer jobs, with one of the most common being working camps. I can't believe that this hasn't been brought up...
Also, in regard to schools giving all S-A's "free" tuition and books... This is not how that works. Kansas State University does not waive those things, even for full ride athletes. The K-State athletic dept has to pay for them. It's the same way for non-athletes. No one just gets a full ride for free...The money comes from somewhere, whether it be a scholarship fund, federal grants, or whatever.
-
I haven't read all of this yet but I imagine MIR kicked everyone's ass
-
ayo saba worked at blockbuster!
-
The assumption that S-A's don't have part time jobs is false. Many have summer jobs, with one of the most common being working camps. I can't believe that this hasn't been brought up...
It wasn't brought up because no one said or assumed that student athletes don't have part time jobs.
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
And what lifestyle is that?
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
why can't they go to the nfl or nba straight out of high school?
The leagues can both make age requirements if they want, they're just mitigating risk, the same way any profit driven business does. What opportunities are available to those that wouldn't get drafted out of high school, and would their compensation be more than, less than, or equal to a full ride athletic scholarship?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
-
The assumption that S-A's don't have part time jobs is false. Many have summer jobs, with one of the most common being working camps. I can't believe that this hasn't been brought up...
It wasn't brought up because no one said or assumed that student athletes don't have part time jobs.
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
-
The assumption that S-A's don't have part time jobs is false. Many have summer jobs, with one of the most common being working camps. I can't believe that this hasn't been brought up...
It wasn't brought up because no one said or assumed that student athletes don't have part time jobs.
So what? GTFO guy. First of all their scholarship and stipend doesn't cover the full cost of being a college student. Their time commitment is so intensive that they cannot hold jobs, can't do much outside of a 10 hour work study. They are waking up at 6AM on random Thurdsays in July to lift weights. They are studying playbooks, watching film, etc. The time commitment is a very big deal, the game is their job, except they don't get paid.
Fair enough, I did mean in season though. My senior year I made $17,000 working two different jobs, athletes can't do that.
You mentioned the camps, for most athletes they would struggle quite a bit over the summer without them. There aren't many jobs in college towns for women's basketball players that can only work good hours April-September.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
why can't they go to the nfl or nba straight out of high school?
The leagues can both make age requirements if they want, they're just mitigating risk, the same way any profit driven business does. What opportunities are available to those that wouldn't get drafted out of high school, and would their compensation be more than, less than, or equal to a full ride athletic scholarship?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
my point is, its bullshit. if they are ready for the nfl or nba let them play. no more of this free farm system bullshit. if a team is willing to take a risk on them, let them.
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
How long would our athletic department remain viable with just athletes who are willing to pay to play sports? Seems like horrible alternative to just compensating people for the time they put in making money for and being the faces of the university.
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
How long would our athletic department remain viable with just athletes who are willing to pay to play sports? Seems like horrible alternative to just compensating people for the time they put in making money for and being the faces of the university.
. That's the problem though how do you fairly compensate?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
How long would our athletic department remain viable with just athletes who are willing to pay to play sports? Seems like horrible alternative to just compensating people for the time they put in making money for and being the faces of the university.
The fact that walkons exist seems to be a big counterargument against paying SAs. If full ride players have it so bad and are being mistreated by the NCAA then why do some kids elect to do it for free?
-
A free degree is pretty sweet. I mean, I'll be paying my student loans off for the end of time. I can only imagine having that $700 a month I pay in student loans in my pocket. I understand the debate to be paid, but lots of ppl out there act like they don't already have a sweet deal. Team dinners, goodies, etc. Also, for some, the college is providing a potential stepping stone to be a professional in that sport by TV recognition and more. Go to town tho, MIR.
-
Another thing that bothers me is that your scholarship can be revoked. It's basically a one year contract and your school has you by the balls
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
why can't they go to the nfl or nba straight out of high school?
The leagues can both make age requirements if they want, they're just mitigating risk, the same way any profit driven business does. What opportunities are available to those that wouldn't get drafted out of high school, and would their compensation be more than, less than, or equal to a full ride athletic scholarship?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
my point is, its bullshit. if they are ready for the nfl or nba let them play. no more of this free farm system bullshit. if a team is willing to take a risk on them, let them.
Honest question, I don't know anything about it. But why aren't NBA ready bball players going the euroball route for a year? seems like they make decent money over there.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
-
If anyone can track down the unemployment rate of SAs who earned their degree then please share. It's probably an impossible stat to keep, but my guess is that it is less than that of non-SAs and much less than that of people without a degree at all.
-
Another thing that bothers me is that your scholarship can be revoked. It's basically a one year contract and your school has you by the balls
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah. Student athletes should be guaranteed their scholarship for at least 4 years, regardless of performance, injury, etc. The school should only be able to take the scholarship back if the athlete quits for non-injury related reasons.
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
How long would our athletic department remain viable with just athletes who are willing to pay to play sports? Seems like horrible alternative to just compensating people for the time they put in making money for and being the faces of the university.
. That's the problem though how do you fairly compensate?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Either full cost of attendance or a stipend, don't care either way. The stipend seems like it's coming sooner rather than later, even the schools are advocating for it now.
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
-
I would have paid money to play fb for the Cats.
You say that because you are ignorant to the hours the athletes put in and the sacrifices they have to make.
Walkons are basically paying money to play football for the Cats, and several people do it every year. I wouldn't want to do it, but it's not that crazy.
How long would our athletic department remain viable with just athletes who are willing to pay to play sports? Seems like horrible alternative to just compensating people for the time they put in making money for and being the faces of the university.
The fact that walkons exist seems to be a big counterargument against paying SAs. If full ride players have it so bad and are being mistreated by the NCAA then why do some kids elect to do it for free?
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
-
Another thing that bothers me is that your scholarship can be revoked. It's basically a one year contract and your school has you by the balls
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah. Student athletes should be guaranteed their scholarship for at least 4 years, regardless of performance, injury, etc. The school should only be able to take the scholarship back if the athlete quits for non-injury related reasons.
How many places have you worked that have promised to employ you regardless of performance? I agree that you can't just take a kid off of scholarship for not being as talented as you expected, but teams shouldn't have to keep players around who don't work, skip class, are late to meetings/practice, etc.
There needs to be some accountability from the SA if he/she wants to be on scholarship.
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
Woah
And yes being a student athlete is a risk and it requires sacrifice on some level
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
why can't they go to the nfl or nba straight out of high school?
The leagues can both make age requirements if they want, they're just mitigating risk, the same way any profit driven business does. What opportunities are available to those that wouldn't get drafted out of high school, and would their compensation be more than, less than, or equal to a full ride athletic scholarship?
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
my point is, its bullshit. if they are ready for the nfl or nba let them play. no more of this free farm system bullshit. if a team is willing to take a risk on them, let them.
Honest question, I don't know anything about it. But why aren't NBA ready bball players going the euroball route for a year? seems like they make decent money over there.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
A few have tried it and it really hasn't worked out for the Euro teams. The teams that can afford it are pretty good and most 18 or 19 year olds are not going to have much of an impact. Brandon Jennings averaged less than 10 points a game for his Italian team, got drafted by the Bucks and put up 15 a game as a rookie. A few big guys tried later and were pretty much a failure on the court and have never made the league.
-
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
They elect to do it because there are privileges that come along with being a SA, regardless of whether you are on scholarship or not. They are able to do it because they have the means necessary to attend college without having to work while they're in school, or they are willing to take on a mountain of debt because they don't want to let go of a dream they've had since they were 5 y/o.
-
Those euro squads don't view themselves as a minor league, they absolutely don't want to host an 18 year old for a year. That really isn't advantageous to building a championship team.
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
Woah
And yes being a student athlete is a risk and it requires sacrifice on some level
Maybe I misunderstood you, or i'm actually responding to an argument I heard at another time, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. I imagine that in most cases, getting a quality education is much harder for athletes than it is for some idiot frat boy (like myself), simply because they had this gargantuan time commitment that they had to attend to. Most people would agree with that, right?
And my last post wasn't meant to be rhetorical. If we accept that scholarship athletes get such a raw deal (which I do), then why are there so many across the country? How do you respond to the idea that no one is holding a gun to these guys' and gals' heads and saying: play college sports?
-
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
They elect to do it because there are privileges that come along with being a SA, regardless of whether you are on scholarship or not. They are able to do it because they have the means necessary to attend college without having to work while they're in school, or they are willing to take on a mountain of debt because they don't want to let go of a dream they've had since they were 5 y/o.
You've made the same point half a dozen different ways. Again I'll ask you, how much money do you think the NCAA and universities will make selling intramurals? If thats what its going to be we won't have to worry about compensation because there won't be any money for the schools or the athletes.
-
Those euro squads don't view themselves as a minor league, they absolutely don't want to host an 18 year old for a year. That really isn't advantageous to building a championship team.
Basketball players can play in the NBDL right out of high school. Very few have done this, but it is an option for them.
-
i lean towards not paying, just because the logistics of it seem sketchy. how much do you pay them? the same for each kid? each sport? male/female?
just don't think it's something that could work without lawsuits and a lot of trouble.
-
Those euro squads don't view themselves as a minor league, they absolutely don't want to host an 18 year old for a year. That really isn't advantageous to building a championship team.
Basketball players can play in the NBDL right out of high school. Very few have done this, but it is an option for them.
That really short St. John's commit did that recently I think. Can't think of his name at the moment.
-
i lean towards not paying, just because the logistics of it seem sketchy. how much do you pay them? the same for each kid? each sport? male/female?
just don't think it's something that could work without lawsuits and a lot of trouble.
I mentioned this type of thing last night. :thumbs:
-
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
They elect to do it because there are privileges that come along with being a SA, regardless of whether you are on scholarship or not. They are able to do it because they have the means necessary to attend college without having to work while they're in school, or they are willing to take on a mountain of debt because they don't want to let go of a dream they've had since they were 5 y/o.
You've made the same point half a dozen different ways. Again I'll ask you, how much money do you think the NCAA and universities will make selling intramurals? If thats what its going to be we won't have to worry about compensation because there won't be any money for the schools or the athletes.
The Ivy League does this, but I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make here.
-
Those euro squads don't view themselves as a minor league, they absolutely don't want to host an 18 year old for a year. That really isn't advantageous to building a championship team.
Basketball players can play in the NBDL right out of high school. Very few have done this, but it is an option for them.
That really short St. John's commit did that recently I think. Can't think of his name at the moment.
Former Cat recruit Latavious Williams also did this when he was ruled academically ineligible to play at Memphis.
-
Lets just give everyone free crap and pay them too! Yeah, that'll work. :buh-bye:
-
they are treated differently than everyone else so shouldn't they be compensated differently than everyone else?
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
-
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
They elect to do it because there are privileges that come along with being a SA, regardless of whether you are on scholarship or not. They are able to do it because they have the means necessary to attend college without having to work while they're in school, or they are willing to take on a mountain of debt because they don't want to let go of a dream they've had since they were 5 y/o.
You've made the same point half a dozen different ways. Again I'll ask you, how much money do you think the NCAA and universities will make selling intramurals? If thats what its going to be we won't have to worry about compensation because there won't be any money for the schools or the athletes.
CFB and CBB are not intramurals but they are distinctly inferior to the NBA and NFL but still make a ton of cash because of the ties the fans have to the schools. Most D league teams have far superior talent to all but the best NCAA teams but no one cares about minor league sports in the USA.
I really have no problem for a stipend for the players in football and mbb as they are the ones earning the money for the university. I do have a problem with paying the same stipend to non revenue athletes, mainly because it would be bad for schools like KSU. There is very little chance of a financial payoff for non rev athletes, even less if the NBA ever decides to stop the charity that is the WNBA.
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
Woah
And yes being a student athlete is a risk and it requires sacrifice on some level
Maybe I misunderstood you, or i'm actually responding to an argument I heard at another time, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. I imagine that in most cases, getting a quality education is much harder for athletes than it is for some idiot frat boy (like myself), simply because they had this gargantuan time commitment that they had to attend to. Most people would agree with that, right?
And my last post wasn't meant to be rhetorical. If we accept that scholarship athletes get such a raw deal (which I do), then why are there so many across the country? How do you respond to the idea that no one is holding a gun to these guys' and gals' heads and saying: play college sports?
I don't think the time commitment from athletes interfere with their quality of education, aside from some missed classroom time. Athletic departments provide plenty of academic resources and all parties have a vested interest in keeping athletes in good academic standing.
The sacrifice is in all of the other stuff that is entailed in being a college student. Athletes simply don't get to enjoy the student life that non athletes do. College is the time of your lives for a reason. I'll tie this to the walkon point that tonite is on. I had the opportunity to walkon a community college basketball team. I did it for two weeks before I discovered that waking up at 5:30 to lift weights when I was never going to play was not to me, best decision I ever made. At K-State we had a walkon basketball player in our fraternity, we rarely saw the guy, his experience in the fraternity was much different than the rest of us. He spent so much time with team related stuff and studying he just didn't have time for anything else. He loved being on the team but it wasn't some glamorous posh life.
Why do they do it? Some feel obligated, some are chasing a dream, some don't know anything else; almost all of them feel an intense sense of camaraderie with their teammates. Again I don't think these athletes are suffering by any means but I don't think the system is doing all for them that they can.
-
i lean towards not paying, just because the logistics of it seem sketchy. how much do you pay them? the same for each kid? each sport? male/female?
just don't think it's something that could work without lawsuits and a lot of trouble.
I mentioned this type of thing last night. :thumbs:
This is my issue with paying athletes as well, but I'm sure with some good planning and thought it could work. Of course, we are trusting the NCAA with this, so who knows. I think longterm schools like K-State wouldn't benefit (and would likely be hurt) by paying athletes.
Its a different discussion, but kids paying to play sports (especially football) is a real thing that is happening more and more now. D3 schools are starting football just to get 60 kids to come and pay to play at their schools. http://deadspin.com/how-division-iii-colleges-profit-from-football-no-one-w-1440369611 Of course, that's a completely different circumstance than what we are talking about because people don't want to come watch that level of football besides parents of the players and a few people in those communities.
-
They elect to do it because they clearly have support coming from somewhere else. You are aware that college, and things you need while in college cost money right?
I'll ask again, do you want our sports teams filled with people who can afford to be walkons? How much money do you think universities would make essentially charging people to watch intramurals? I'm sure advertisers would flock to that.
They elect to do it because there are privileges that come along with being a SA, regardless of whether you are on scholarship or not. They are able to do it because they have the means necessary to attend college without having to work while they're in school, or they are willing to take on a mountain of debt because they don't want to let go of a dream they've had since they were 5 y/o.
You've made the same point half a dozen different ways. Again I'll ask you, how much money do you think the NCAA and universities will make selling intramurals? If thats what its going to be we won't have to worry about compensation because there won't be any money for the schools or the athletes.
The Ivy League does this, but I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make here.
Ivy League and Patriot League athletes are on scholarship just not athletic scholarship. And your ivy league example slammed my point home. They don't attract top flight athletes, their schools athletic departments make no money for their schools, they may as well be D2.
-
i lean towards not paying, just because the logistics of it seem sketchy. how much do you pay them? the same for each kid? each sport? male/female?
just don't think it's something that could work without lawsuits and a lot of trouble.
I mentioned this type of thing last night. :thumbs:
Lets just give everyone free crap and pay them too! Yeah, that'll work. :buh-bye:
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
I realize the posters I quotes here and their track record of reading and comprehension but who the hell said anything about paying athletes?
-
A stipend is the same thing as paying athletes. Wake up.
-
Salary cap
-
If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
A stipend is the same thing as paying athletes. Wake up.
how exactly would you set it up so this would be something that could be set up across the board and be attainable for all sports and SA's?
-
If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
A stipend is the same thing as paying athletes. Wake up.
how exactly would you set it up so this would be something that could be set up across the board and be attainable for all sports and SA's?
That is the problem. I don't think you can fairly extend compensation between every sport and SA without someone getting screwed. The best chance of success for something like this, would be if each sport individually presented their "compensation package" to the governing body. If each sport was governed separately it has a chance, but sharing an entire athletic budget equally for every sport and SA just isn't going to work.
-
I say give them a small additional stipend and get it over with. A few hundred bucks a month to cover clothing and other costs that are not included in their current scholarships. They're already getting paid just pay them a little more to cover the true cost of going to college.
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
Yup. Knew that was coming.
-
If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
A stipend is the same thing as paying athletes. Wake up.
how exactly would you set it up so this would be something that could be set up across the board and be attainable for all sports and SA's?
That is the problem. I don't think you can fairly extend compensation between every sport and SA without someone getting screwed. The best chance of success for something like this, would be if each sport individually presented their "compensation package" to the governing body. If each sport was governed separately it has a chance, but sharing an entire athletic budget equally for every sport and SA just isn't going to work.
What are you talking about? The cost of attendance doesn't change based on what sport you play.
-
troubledscribe more like trouble describing whatever the hell your point it
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
Yup. Knew that was coming.
It was such an offensive point, I wish I wouldn't have been the one to point it out.
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
And what lifestyle is that?
Full meal plan, probably decent (better than ghetto apartment) housing...
Ugh, and I don't know about anyone else, but if parents send their kids to college isn't there some responsibility to make sure your kid has clothes? I mean yeah, I've heard it on here before, but having a child myself, I think there is NOT one scenario possible that my bills just to have him under my roof don't exceed $50/month-if the kid is so bad off with his paid meals, housing, tutoring, etc...send that $50/mo for some play money.
AND if the kid comes from a household where there isn't even that $50 to be had, then they are probably thanking their lucky stars for a warm bed and hot meals, because without their athletic talents it is unlikely that they would even have that.
Additionally, yeah, college-time of your life-I doubt there are many student athletes who don't consider what they are doing the "time of their life". It is all how you choose to live it.
PS-DIII swimmer. :buh-bye:
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
Not a stipend, extra university benefits or something that has monetary value but can't be exchanged for actual money.
I'm not saying they will spend it any differently than their peers, per say. I actually played college baseball at a CC on scholarship for 2 years, before having my son and not finishing a bachelors. You know what we did with any excess money we had? Spent it on rough ridin' alcohol and garbage. We received $100 dollars of food money per week and I wish that would have been in a fund for after school that I could have accessed instead of blowing it. (Maybe that is a more acceptable form of payment? If a stipend, money that will be released after their athletic careers at the university are complete.) Now I have to take out student loans just to finish up schooling after dropping out to find a job. Basically I'm trying to say that any addition money they receive, the majority of it, is going to be wasted if you give it directly to the kids. They are kids and a large portion of the time, they aren't going to make the smart decision, be they white, black, purple or what the eff ever color you are.
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
And what lifestyle is that?
Full meal plan, probably decent (better than ghetto apartment) housing...
Ugh, and I don't know about anyone else, but if parents send their kids to college isn't there some responsibility to make sure your kid has clothes? I mean yeah, I've heard it on here before, but having a child myself, I think there is NOT one scenario possible that my bills just to have him under my roof don't exceed $50/month-if the kid is so bad off with his paid meals, housing, tutoring, etc...send that $50/mo for some play money.
AND if the kid comes from a household where there isn't even that $50 to be had, then they are probably thanking their lucky stars for a warm bed and hot meals, because without their athletic talents it is unlikely that they would even have that.
Additionally, yeah, college-time of your life-I doubt there are many student athletes who don't consider what they are doing the "time of their life". It is all how you choose to live it.
PS-DIII swimmer. :buh-bye:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/1/18/college-athletessaytheyneedpaytocoverbasiccostsofliving.html
-
troubledscribe more like trouble describing whatever the hell your point it
My point is: I don't think student athletes should be given any additional money to what they are already able to receive. Extra benefits in other forms through their university sure, but paying them or giving them an additional stipend isn't going to work.
-
The two things that need to be addressed when it comes to paying athletes or a stipend are:
1) Does an athlete get paid the same from school to school at the same level
2) Does an athlete get paid the same whether male/female or from sport to sport
Everybody wants to talk about all the money the NCAA makes, and they do, but if you break it down across every D1 athlete is it enough to cover their expenses? Personally, I think they should just allow athlete dorms and put some resources in there. Make the athlete dorms obligated to house the same percentage of athletes from each sport and throw a few other simple regulations in there. Make the onus of the regulations on the dorms land on the University and not the student athlete
An athlete does get a lot paid for and the University does make a lot of money off their backs. I don't know if this entitles the athlete to incur no expenses or debt over 4 years but the NCAA/schools should do more. An athlete wants money to go to the bars or whatever, they should pay it.
-
I say give them a small additional stipend and get it over with. A few hundred bucks a month to cover clothing and other costs that are not included in their current scholarships. They're already getting paid just pay them a little more to cover the true cost of going to college.
This is already available to SAs who need it through the NCAA's Special Assistance Fund. If a player really needs money for things like clothes or school supplies they can get it.
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
Woah
And yes being a student athlete is a risk and it requires sacrifice on some level
Maybe I misunderstood you, or i'm actually responding to an argument I heard at another time, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. I imagine that in most cases, getting a quality education is much harder for athletes than it is for some idiot frat boy (like myself), simply because they had this gargantuan time commitment that they had to attend to. Most people would agree with that, right?
And my last post wasn't meant to be rhetorical. If we accept that scholarship athletes get such a raw deal (which I do), then why are there so many across the country? How do you respond to the idea that no one is holding a gun to these guys' and gals' heads and saying: play college sports?
I don't think the time commitment from athletes interfere with their quality of education, aside from some missed classroom time. Athletic departments provide plenty of academic resources and all parties have a vested interest in keeping athletes in good academic standing.
The sacrifice is in all of the other stuff that is entailed in being a college student. Athletes simply don't get to enjoy the student life that non athletes do. College is the time of your lives for a reason. I'll tie this to the walkon point that tonite is on. I had the opportunity to walkon a community college basketball team. I did it for two weeks before I discovered that waking up at 5:30 to lift weights when I was never going to play was not to me, best decision I ever made. At K-State we had a walkon basketball player in our fraternity, we rarely saw the guy, his experience in the fraternity was much different than the rest of us. He spent so much time with team related stuff and studying he just didn't have time for anything else. He loved being on the team but it wasn't some glamorous posh life.
Why do they do it? Some feel obligated, some are chasing a dream, some don't know anything else; almost all of them feel an intense sense of camaraderie with their teammates. Again I don't think these athletes are suffering by any means but I don't think the system is doing all for them that they can.
I'll bet that a lot of players enjoy playing college football/basketball just as much as another would enjoy drinking beer in Aggieville. Sure, it's a different college experience, but I think most of them look back on their college experience pretty positively.
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
Not a stipend, extra university benefits or something that has monetary value but can't be exchanged for actual money.
I'm not saying they will spend it any differently than their peers, per say. I actually played college baseball at a CC on scholarship for 2 years, before having my son and not finishing a bachelors. You know what we did with any excess money we had? Spent it on rough ridin' alcohol and garbage. We received $100 dollars of food money per week and I wish that would have been in a fund for after school that I could have accessed instead of blowing it. (Maybe that is a more acceptable form of payment? If a stipend, money that will be released after their athletic careers at the university are complete.) Now I have to take out student loans just to finish up schooling after dropping out to find a job. Basically I'm trying to say that any addition money they receive, the majority of it, is going to be wasted if you give it directly to the kids. They are kids and a large portion of the time, they aren't going to make the smart decision, be they white, black, purple or what the eff ever color you are.
So you didn't spend it on "drugs, cars, strip clubs, and casinos?"
-
Seems to me that agreeing to be a scholarship student athlete is a huge risk, at least from the description MIR is giving, which I assume is correct. You're sacrificing any real shot at a quality education, you're basically doomed to be broke in college, and the odds of going pro are astronomically small.
So why are there so damn many scholarship athletes across the country? Are scholarship athletes uninformed suckers when it comes to this stuff?
Woah
And yes being a student athlete is a risk and it requires sacrifice on some level
Maybe I misunderstood you, or i'm actually responding to an argument I heard at another time, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. I imagine that in most cases, getting a quality education is much harder for athletes than it is for some idiot frat boy (like myself), simply because they had this gargantuan time commitment that they had to attend to. Most people would agree with that, right?
And my last post wasn't meant to be rhetorical. If we accept that scholarship athletes get such a raw deal (which I do), then why are there so many across the country? How do you respond to the idea that no one is holding a gun to these guys' and gals' heads and saying: play college sports?
I don't think the time commitment from athletes interfere with their quality of education, aside from some missed classroom time. Athletic departments provide plenty of academic resources and all parties have a vested interest in keeping athletes in good academic standing.
The sacrifice is in all of the other stuff that is entailed in being a college student. Athletes simply don't get to enjoy the student life that non athletes do. College is the time of your lives for a reason. I'll tie this to the walkon point that tonite is on. I had the opportunity to walkon a community college basketball team. I did it for two weeks before I discovered that waking up at 5:30 to lift weights when I was never going to play was not to me, best decision I ever made. At K-State we had a walkon basketball player in our fraternity, we rarely saw the guy, his experience in the fraternity was much different than the rest of us. He spent so much time with team related stuff and studying he just didn't have time for anything else. He loved being on the team but it wasn't some glamorous posh life.
Why do they do it? Some feel obligated, some are chasing a dream, some don't know anything else; almost all of them feel an intense sense of camaraderie with their teammates. Again I don't think these athletes are suffering by any means but I don't think the system is doing all for them that they can.
I'll bet that a lot of players enjoy playing college football/basketball just as much as another would enjoy drinking beer in Aggieville. Sure, it's a different college experience, but I think most of them look back on their college experience pretty positively.
I made that point in the post that you quoted.
-
Paying college athletes is the absolute worst idea I've ever heard of. You know what they will spend the money on? Food? No. Drugs, Cars, Strip Clubs, and Casinos. College sports will turn into GTA5 on steroids. If schools really want to better support their student athletes, then the colleges need to negotiate with the NCAA a better compensation package along with their scholarships.
So a stipend? Do you have more than one person posting under your screen name?
Also the more I think about the non bolded part of the post the more pissed off I get. Why in the holy hell do you think athletes would spend excess money any differently than any other of their 21 year old peers? How is that any different than saying "don't give the poor dumb niggers any more than we think they need, they won't be able to help themselves anyway. They'll just use the money to terrorize our campus."
Not a stipend, extra university benefits or something that has monetary value but can't be exchanged for actual money.
I'm not saying they will spend it any differently than their peers, per say. I actually played college baseball at a CC on scholarship for 2 years, before having my son and not finishing a bachelors. You know what we did with any excess money we had? Spent it on rough ridin' alcohol and garbage. We received $100 dollars of food money per week and I wish that would have been in a fund for after school that I could have accessed instead of blowing it. (Maybe that is a more acceptable form of payment? If a stipend, money that will be released after their athletic careers at the university are complete.) Now I have to take out student loans just to finish up schooling after dropping out to find a job. Basically I'm trying to say that any addition money they receive, the majority of it, is going to be wasted if you give it directly to the kids. They are kids and a large portion of the time, they aren't going to make the smart decision, be they white, black, purple or what the eff ever color you are.
So you didn't spend it on "drugs, cars, strip clubs, and casinos?"
Yes, I did spend it on that and it was an amazing time.
-
I personally would love to see an approach in College like that of free agency. Let the free market work everything out.
-
Why does all of troubledscribe's posts contradict with previous posts that he made? Are you forgetting to log your sock on when arguing with yourself?
-
I personally would love to see an approach in College like that of free agency. Let the free market work everything out.
:confused:
Like no rules?
-
The two things that need to be addressed when it comes to paying athletes or a stipend are:
1) Does an athlete get paid the same from school to school at the same level
2) Does an athlete get paid the same whether male/female or from sport to sport
First thing's first. Athletes have it pretty f'n good, if you ask me. All of the benefits that they get have been thoroughly hashed out in this thread. But, NONE of these benefits equate to cash in hand. spending money. If I'm Jow Blow 4.0 A+++ National Honor Society Fullbright/Rhodes Scholar, I get pretty sweet benefits too. Basically, aside from the health plan and athletic gear, I get all the same crap as the elite athletes. However, if I want to make a few thousand extra bucks a year, I can get a job at the University and make some cash to spend on whatever the eff I want. Maybe I want to go to spring break with my biology buddies. I've got 2,500 in the bank because I got a job with the University. why are athletes any different? Johnny Linebacker is "working" for the University just the same as Johnny Biology grading tests and tutoring struggling students. The only difference is that the latter can get paid for his service to the University.
So to ChiCat's questions (which I think are the biggest unknowns):
1) Yes. Absolutely. I can see a scenario where the NCAA gives schools a ceiling, mandating an amount of compensation that may not be exceeded. Let's say it's $2,500.00 per season. This way, talent is not purchased by schools. It would be a salary cap, of sorts. If a school doesn't want to pay out its total salary cap, that's fine. But, they'll not be very competitive. on the flip side, with a reasonable cap, snaller schools can still compete with larger schools.
2) Yes. Untill the football breaks away from the NCAA and the academic institutions, I imagine all athletes across all sports will require an equal payment. Don't know crap about Title IX, but I imagine female rowers and Johnny Manziel would have to receive the same amount.
-
i get angry when people include cell phone plans in their list of monthly expenses. buy an ipod touch and use wifi. get a rough ridin' flip phone from quicktrip and stop spending $100/month
should the athletic department just provide everyone with a phone? big group plan?
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
This already happens with the money that they are allowed for housing. Once a student athlete moves out of the dorms then they just get a monthly check to cover housing. That check isn't going to be the same at USC as it is at K-State. So most of these kids are already getting monthly checks as it is. Just beef them up a little bit so they don't have to hardly scrape by. But make no mistake these kids are already getting paid and the stuff you're bringing up is already going on.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
-
Its a NCAA violation for athletes to sell that stuff, clown. Even if they could do you really think they have enough of that stuff to make good money off of it. There aren't that many weirdos that wants to buy used practice gear, gross.
It happened in my house several times, non of the goods were used.
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
This already happens with the money that they are allowed for housing. Once a student athlete moves out of the dorms then they just get a monthly check to cover housing. That check isn't going to be the same at USC as it is at K-State. So most of these kids are already getting monthly checks as it is. Just beef them up a little bit so they don't have to hardly scrape by. The thing needs to understand about this is they are already getting checks it's not something new and most of the issues you are bringing up have already been addressed.
Most athletes complain about not having any money. books/tuition/housing are all fantastic benefits. Nobody disputes this. But none of these benefits put cash in the bank. Again, plenty of students get the same benefits the athletes get (minus the athletic gear and maybe healthcare). The difference is that if a student wants to work on the side to put money in the bank, the student is permitted to do so. You can't take a girl on a date using your free books and school supplies. you need cash and, if you don't have cash, you need parents or a job.
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
This already happens with the money that they are allowed for housing. Once a student athlete moves out of the dorms then they just get a monthly check to cover housing. That check isn't going to be the same at USC as it is at K-State. So most of these kids are already getting monthly checks as it is. Just beef them up a little bit so they don't have to hardly scrape by. The thing needs to understand about this is they are already getting checks it's not something new and most of the issues you are bringing up have already been addressed.
Most athletes complain about not having any money. books/tuition/housing are all fantastic benefits. Nobody disputes this. But none of these benefits put cash in the bank. Again, plenty of students get the same benefits the athletes get (minus the athletic gear and maybe healthcare). The difference is that if a student wants to work on the side to put money in the bank, the student is permitted to do so. You can't take a girl on a date using your free books and school supplies. you need cash and, if you don't have cash, you need parents or a job.
or pell grants or student loans
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
You could have gotten great grades in highschool. And if you'd done this, you would have had a full ride + books and tuition to a state school like K-State. If you had to take out loans, it's because the academic institution didn't value your academic skills. no offense intended. Students are recruited to schools in much the same way athletes are.
My friend's sister is in a graduate biology program at the University of Indiana. She gets her tuition/books/housing all provided. Oh yeah, and she also makes over 50K a year as a graduate assistant (according to my friend).
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
This already happens with the money that they are allowed for housing. Once a student athlete moves out of the dorms then they just get a monthly check to cover housing. That check isn't going to be the same at USC as it is at K-State. So most of these kids are already getting monthly checks as it is. Just beef them up a little bit so they don't have to hardly scrape by. The thing needs to understand about this is they are already getting checks it's not something new and most of the issues you are bringing up have already been addressed.
Most athletes complain about not having any money. books/tuition/housing are all fantastic benefits. Nobody disputes this. But none of these benefits put cash in the bank. Again, plenty of students get the same benefits the athletes get (minus the athletic gear and maybe healthcare). The difference is that if a student wants to work on the side to put money in the bank, the student is permitted to do so. You can't take a girl on a date using your free books and school supplies. you need cash and, if you don't have cash, you need parents or a job.
or pell grants or student loans
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
-
I personally would love to see an approach in College like that of free agency. Let the free market work everything out.
:confused:
Like no rules?
Yeah, mainly just see what that would be like. Personally I think it would probably work out a lot better than the current situation does. At least everything would be out in the open.
Bottom line is that being a student athlete is a very time consuming full time job. They should be properly compensated for what the market dictates.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
You could have gotten great grades in highschool. And if you'd done this, you would have had a full ride + books and tuition to a state school like K-State. If you had to take out loans, it's because the academic institution didn't value your academic skills. no offense intended. Students are recruited to schools in much the same way athletes are.
My friend's sister is in a graduate biology program at the University of Indiana. She gets her tuition/books/housing all provided. Oh yeah, and she also makes over 50K a year as a graduate assistant (according to my friend).
You sound like you graduated in 1980. This crap isn't that cheap or easy anymore. I work 20 hours a week and will spend the better part of the semester just paying off my books ($1,700)
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
You could have gotten great grades in highschool. And if you'd done this, you would have had a full ride + books and tuition to a state school like K-State. If you had to take out loans, it's because the academic institution didn't value your academic skills. no offense intended. Students are recruited to schools in much the same way athletes are.
My friend's sister is in a graduate biology program at the University of Indiana. She gets her tuition/books/housing all provided. Oh yeah, and she also makes over 50K a year as a graduate assistant (according to my friend).
You sound like you graduated in 1980. This crap isn't that cheap or easy anymore. I work 20 hours a week and will spend the better part of the semester just paying off my books ($1,700)
For one, I graduated in the 2000s. Secondly, I didn't say it was cheap or easy. I didn't get a full ride either. But, it's also incredibly hard to be a DI football player at a BCS school. Only the absolute best of the best, cream of the crop, are good enough to get the benefits that come along with a BCS football scholarship. Same is true for students. It ain't easy, but there are at least 85 students at KSU (same as football scholarship limit) who are getting full rides to KSU (books, tuition, housing). Your same logic applies to these stud academics. With all of their benefits, "they get plenty as it is." right? why should they be able to earn some spending money? just take out a loan. sounds pretty Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) when you think about it like that, doesn't it?
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
You could have gotten great grades in highschool. And if you'd done this, you would have had a full ride + books and tuition to a state school like K-State. If you had to take out loans, it's because the academic institution didn't value your academic skills. no offense intended. Students are recruited to schools in much the same way athletes are.
My friend's sister is in a graduate biology program at the University of Indiana. She gets her tuition/books/housing all provided. Oh yeah, and she also makes over 50K a year as a graduate assistant (according to my friend).
You sound like you graduated in 1980. This crap isn't that cheap or easy anymore. I work 20 hours a week and will spend the better part of the semester just paying off my books ($1,700)
one semester my book was too expensive to justify funneling booze money towards it...so i did homework in the bookstore
problem solved
-
How many players at K-State are really worth getting paid in addition to what their scholarship covers...10? 20?
-
I rarely bought books and rarely needed them. Worst case would borrow from someone in the class and buy them a few brews. I'm sure it depends on the major but $1,700 :sdeek:
-
I rarely bought books and rarely needed them. Worst case would borrow from someone in the class and buy them a few brews. I'm sure it depends on the major but $1,700 :sdeek:
exactly. if you pay full price for books...you are doing it wrong
-
How many players at K-State are really worth getting paid in addition to what their scholarship covers...10? 20?
The thing is they are already spending crazy amount of money on these kis. So the argument isn't really are they worth the money? It's obvious that they are worth the money to the schools because the schools are spending huge sums of money on faclities, coaches, recruiting expenses etc to attract the kids and keep them happy once they get there. The question isn't really about the money it's more about how it is allocated and how much do you let them decide how to spend vs. spending it for them.
-
Should different schools give different stipends based upon cost of living? I'm just not sure. Requiring every school to just provide student housing to all scholarship athletes with a meal plan just makes more sense to me. That way all expenses are paid for, and no school gets the advantages/disadvantages that would come with a standard across-the-board stipend.
This already happens with the money that they are allowed for housing. Once a student athlete moves out of the dorms then they just get a monthly check to cover housing. That check isn't going to be the same at USC as it is at K-State. So most of these kids are already getting monthly checks as it is. Just beef them up a little bit so they don't have to hardly scrape by. The thing needs to understand about this is they are already getting checks it's not something new and most of the issues you are bringing up have already been addressed.
Most athletes complain about not having any money. books/tuition/housing are all fantastic benefits. Nobody disputes this. But none of these benefits put cash in the bank. Again, plenty of students get the same benefits the athletes get (minus the athletic gear and maybe healthcare). The difference is that if a student wants to work on the side to put money in the bank, the student is permitted to do so. You can't take a girl on a date using your free books and school supplies. you need cash and, if you don't have cash, you need parents or a job.
or pell grants or student loans
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
-
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
I'm not talking about books, tuition, and living expenses. I'm talking about extra cash (i.e. drinking money). The stud athletes and stud academics are all benefitting from free tuition/books/housing. no athletes are complaing about that. the issue is whether they should get extra money on the side. You're saying that if they want that "extra money" they should apply for a pell grant.
-
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
I'm not talking about books, tuition, and living expenses. I'm talking about extra cash (i.e. drinking money). The stud athletes and stud academics are all benefitting from free tuition/books/housing. no athletes are complaing about that. the issue is whether they should get extra money on the side. You're saying that if they want that "extra money" they should apply for a pell grant donate plasma.
-
if they are going to pay, do they still get scholly's?
-
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
I'm not talking about books, tuition, and living expenses. I'm talking about extra cash (i.e. drinking money). The stud athletes and stud academics are all benefitting from free tuition/books/housing. no athletes are complaing about that. the issue is whether they should get extra money on the side. You're saying that if they want that "extra money" they should apply for a pell grant.
Yes. If that money is available then they should apply for it.
-
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
I'm not talking about books, tuition, and living expenses. I'm talking about extra cash (i.e. drinking money). The stud athletes and stud academics are all benefitting from free tuition/books/housing. no athletes are complaing about that. the issue is whether they should get extra money on the side. You're saying that if they want that "extra money" they should apply for a pell grant.
you said if someone had a job they wouldn't need a loan and i said that was stupid because it was. also, i absolutely do think that if a student athlete needs money, the financial aid office is the first place they should go. but i'm also hoping the athletic dept has already helped them out here and that financial aid is discussed before they even end up on campus. i also think they should get something a little more than what they currently get. the point is that for athletes who truly do not get help from family, there are ways for them to get money. pell grants would be available and you can get around 5k/year in them. that's more than $400/month, more than houseboy money, not a loan and can be used houwever the student wants to use it.
-
You're right. but, of course, you don't need to take out a loan when you have a job. so, the question is whether their athletic services are a job. I was a houseboy. I had friends who worked in aggieville. so we could have extra cash. we didn't need to take out interest bearing loans for our drinking money. Neither should these athletes who, through their labor, generate millions of dollars in revenue to pay university coaches and administrators.
it would be very, very, very challenging to make enough money from work to cover the cost of tuition, books and living expenses while still being a fulltime student. lord knows a freaking houseboy salary would not cut it.
I'm not talking about books, tuition, and living expenses. I'm talking about extra cash (i.e. drinking money). The stud athletes and stud academics are all benefitting from free tuition/books/housing. no athletes are complaing about that. the issue is whether they should get extra money on the side. You're saying that if they want that "extra money" they should apply for a pell grant.
Yes. If that money is available then they should apply for it.
It is available to some and they do apply for it and receive it.
-
i get angry when people include cell phone plans in their list of monthly expenses. buy an ipod touch and use wifi. get a rough ridin' flip phone from quicktrip and stop spending $100/month
should the athletic department just provide everyone with a phone? big group plan?
QT provides free cell phones and call plans :Wha:
-
I concede that a student athlete can obtain funds from other sources. So, their argument that they are broke is not entirely legitimate.
At the same time, nobody in this thread has answered the underlying question: Are athletic services "employment?" Along the same lines, how are student A (compensated graduate assistant) and student B (uncompensated student athlete) any different? fundamentally, why are they treated any differently? both are students, both are getting benefits, but one student is paid by the university for their services whereas the other student is told to eff off.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
Its so funny that mediocre ass students who provided jack crap to their school think student athletes should be held to the same standard. You were a C machine who ate up university resources.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
Its so funny that mediocre ass students who provided jack crap to their school think student athletes should be held to the same standard. You were a C machine who ate up university resources.
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
-
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
true, but you can certainly assume that he was not an elite student athlete with his choice of academic institutions. He's not like the football players on scholarship at a BCS school.
-
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
true, but you can certainly assume that he was not an elite student athlete with his choice of academic institutions. He's not like the football players on scholarship at a BCS school.
well yeah. you can certainly assume that because he freaking already said he wasn't. it's like i don't even know what in the world you guys are talking about right now. i mean what's the freaking point?
-
I concede that a student athlete can obtain funds from other sources. So, their argument that they are broke is not entirely legitimate.
At the same time, nobody in this thread has answered the underlying question: Are athletic services "employment?" Along the same lines, how are student A (compensated graduate assistant) and student B (uncompensated student athlete) any different? fundamentally, why are they treated any differently? both are students, both are getting benefits, but one student is paid by the university for their services whereas the other student is told to eff off.
I think that ultimately athletic service is employment. The employees accept the terms of compensation (which is very adequate) when they sign their LOI and grant in aid agreement.
-
I concede that a student athlete can obtain funds from other sources. So, their argument that they are broke is not entirely legitimate.
At the same time, nobody in this thread has answered the underlying question: Are athletic services "employment?" Along the same lines, how are student A (compensated graduate assistant) and student B (uncompensated student athlete) any different? fundamentally, why are they treated any differently? both are students, both are getting benefits, but one student is paid by the university for their services whereas the other student is told to eff off.
The graduate assistant already has a degree that they could use to find a better job elsewhere. The school has to pay them or there would be no graduate assistants except in fields that require a graduate degree to make any real money.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
Its so funny that mediocre ass students who provided jack crap to their school think student athletes should be held to the same standard. You were a C machine who ate up university resources.
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
Was that the basis for my assumption? Would be pretty bizarre considering what I've said about me itt.
-
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
true, but you can certainly assume that he was not an elite student athlete with his choice of academic institutions. He's not like the football players on scholarship at a BCS school.
well yeah. you can certainly assume that because he freaking already said he wasn't. it's like i don't even know what in the world you guys are talking about right now. i mean what's the freaking point?
I'm frustrated because I can't tell if you're trolling or not, I feel like I can tell but then I just get confused again.
-
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
true, but you can certainly assume that he was not an elite student athlete with his choice of academic institutions. He's not like the football players on scholarship at a BCS school.
well yeah. you can certainly assume that because he freaking already said he wasn't. it's like i don't even know what in the world you guys are talking about right now. i mean what's the freaking point?
I'm frustrated because I can't tell if you're trolling or not, I feel like I can tell but then I just get confused again.
i think we're both confused. our feelings on the subject are probably fairly similar and i think we're talking about different stuff simultaneously. ships passing in the night. friendly ships though that like each other. with that said i'm out. this thread is making my head hurt but put me on team give athletes more than what they currently get.
-
while his whole post is wrong, you can't just assume he was a mediocre student or c maching that ate up university resources just because he took out loans and worked to be able to go to college.
true, but you can certainly assume that he was not an elite student athlete with his choice of academic institutions. He's not like the football players on scholarship at a BCS school.
well yeah. you can certainly assume that because he freaking already said he wasn't. it's like i don't even know what in the world you guys are talking about right now. i mean what's the freaking point?
the point is that elite students and elite athletes are similarly situated. both get benefits like housing, tuition, books, etc. difference that nobody can explain is that the elite student can work for the university and get cash, in addition to his/her sick academic benefits. but, nobody's up in arms about the student getting cash from the school. that's the double standard.
That's the point. and it's pretty obvious.
-
Not that anyone really seems to be debating this point, but I've had a Football and Equestrian athlete work for me in Manhattan. They were both good enough employees so that there usually weren't issues, but occasionally a coach would try to do something just to sabotage their working anywhere. Wasn't constant but one week would be a pain in my ass every 3 months or so.
-
Not that anyone really seems to be debating this point, but I've had a Football and Equestrian athlete work for me in Manhattan. They were both good enough employees so that there usually weren't issues, but occasionally a coach would try to do something just to sabotage their working anywhere. Wasn't constant but one week would be a pain in my ass every 3 months or so.
Didn't Andre McDonald work while dipping his ass off at The Fridge?
-
Seems like student athletes get a choice. You take it or you don't. If they didn't take the scholly, and went to college and had some crappy job, they still couldn't afford the lifestyle the scholarship provides.
This is the point I wanted to make, but I was busy making stupid analogies.
Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk
And what lifestyle is that?
Full meal plan, probably decent (better than ghetto apartment) housing...
Ugh, and I don't know about anyone else, but if parents send their kids to college isn't there some responsibility to make sure your kid has clothes? I mean yeah, I've heard it on here before, but having a child myself, I think there is NOT one scenario possible that my bills just to have him under my roof don't exceed $50/month-if the kid is so bad off with his paid meals, housing, tutoring, etc...send that $50/mo for some play money.
AND if the kid comes from a household where there isn't even that $50 to be had, then they are probably thanking their lucky stars for a warm bed and hot meals, because without their athletic talents it is unlikely that they would even have that.
Additionally, yeah, college-time of your life-I doubt there are many student athletes who don't consider what they are doing the "time of their life". It is all how you choose to live it.
PS-DIII swimmer. :buh-bye:
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/1/18/college-athletessaytheyneedpaytocoverbasiccostsofliving.html
MIR, this is the reason I put this in the Cigars thread. It's about the division of D1 schools... those that can afford it and those that can't. Also there's a bunch of fools on this thread that don't realize big schools or should I say BCS caliber schools can very easily afford to pay the kids a couple or three thousand bucks to cover expenses. Many schools are spending millions of dollars for things that will entice top recruits to pay. Why you say, because this how you make money as an AD.
-
They get plenty as it is. I had to work and get loans to go to school, being a stud athlete on scholly would have been so much easier.
So you don't mind getting up at 4:30 AM and lifting weights, running wind sprints, etc...; or getting the rough ridin' wind knocked out of you in the three hours of practice you will put in doing whatever crap the coaches want you to do. eff yea, it's such an easy life being an SA. :dubious:
-
How many players at K-State are really worth getting paid in addition to what their scholarship covers...10? 20?
Not sure, but each player for Alabama the season they played ND in the MNC was valued at $556,000. This was the worth estimated by the school's AD. Art Briles stated last year that RGIII was worth 130 million dollars in value to Baylor University. So how many are you shitting your pants over a $3,000.00 a year stipend.
-
This whole thread is pointless anyway. Ultimately this decision is up to the NCAA and no one else. Do you think the NCAA or the schools under it are going to hand out money when they damn well every athlete in the nation from now until the end of time is going to play NCAA sports for whatever compensation the NCAA calls fair?
-
This whole thread is pointless anyway. Ultimately this decision is up to the NCAA and no one else. Do you think the NCAA or the schools under it are going to hand out money when they damn well every athlete in the nation from now until the end of time is going to play NCAA sports for whatever compensation the NCAA calls fair?
Assuming the NCAA is the sole authority is wrong. In fact, with Northwestern unionizing and the O'Bannon lawsuit it is entirely possible that the NCAA is largely powerless in a very short time frame.
A possible future:
1) O'Bannon lawsuit requires massive NCAA settlement to ex-players. EA and other video game makers shun the NCAA drying up a lucrative revenue stream. Subsequent lawsuits explore whether players deserve a piece of the TV/sneaker/jersey/ad money
2) Northwestern football team union is certified. They begin recruiting players from other schools to join.
3) College presidents and athletic directors look for ways to further separate the assets of the school and the athletic departments. Hold emergency meetings with representatives from NBA/NFL.
4) BCS partners with NFL, BCS+ hoops schools partner with NBA to secure revenue streams and to create independence from schools. Schools sell jersey sponsorships, and sign agreements to receive dollars from pro sports teams, to supplement revenue streams open up video game revenue again.
5) Baseball/Olympic/Title IX sports are kept under intercollegiate/NCAA umbrella and continue to compete under old rules.
-
This whole thread is pointless anyway. Ultimately this decision is up to the NCAA and no one else. Do you think the NCAA or the schools under it are going to hand out money when they damn well every athlete in the nation from now until the end of time is going to play NCAA sports for whatever compensation the NCAA calls fair?
Assuming the NCAA is the sole authority is wrong. In fact, with Northwestern unionizing and the O'Bannon lawsuit it is entirely possible that the NCAA is largely powerless in a very short time frame.
A possible future:
1) O'Bannon lawsuit requires massive NCAA settlement to ex-players. EA and other video game makers shun the NCAA drying up a lucrative revenue stream. Subsequent lawsuits explore whether players deserve a piece of the TV/sneaker/jersey/ad money
2) Northwestern football team union is certified. They begin recruiting players from other schools to join.
3) College presidents and athletic directors look for ways to further separate the assets of the school and the athletic departments. Hold emergency meetings with representatives from NBA/NFL.
4) BCS partners with NFL, BCS+ hoops schools partner with NBA to secure revenue streams and to create independence from schools. Schools sell jersey sponsorships, and sign agreements to receive dollars from pro sports teams, to supplement revenue streams open up video game revenue again.
5) Baseball/Olympic/Title IX sports are kept under intercollegiate/NCAA umbrella and continue to compete under old rules.
This. Especially the northwestern union issue. Courts have held in the past that student athletes aren't employees, thereby prohibiting unionization. But this posture becomes increasingly problematic given the exponential growth in the money printing industry that is NCAA athletics.
Think about all of the players in the NCAA industry. Coaches, trainers, officials, administrators, commentators, compliance officers, etc. every single player, at every level is making money. Everybody except the rough ridin' athletes.
-
There is absolutely no way that there is enough revenue for every D1 school to simultaneously maintain compliance with Title IX and pay revenue sport athletes. We are already at the point of no return with the arms race on facilities. The decoupling of basketball and football from the rest of the university will save athletic depts. and universities from the financial doom that is knocking at their doorstep.
-
This whole thread is pointless anyway. Ultimately this decision is up to the NCAA and no one else. Do you think the NCAA or the schools under it are going to hand out money when they damn well every athlete in the nation from now until the end of time is going to play NCAA sports for whatever compensation the NCAA calls fair?
Assuming the NCAA is the sole authority is wrong. In fact, with Northwestern unionizing and the O'Bannon lawsuit it is entirely possible that the NCAA is largely powerless in a very short time frame.
A possible future:
1) O'Bannon lawsuit requires massive NCAA settlement to ex-players. EA and other video game makers shun the NCAA drying up a lucrative revenue stream. Subsequent lawsuits explore whether players deserve a piece of the TV/sneaker/jersey/ad money
2) Northwestern football team union is certified. They begin recruiting players from other schools to join.
3) College presidents and athletic directors look for ways to further separate the assets of the school and the athletic departments. Hold emergency meetings with representatives from NBA/NFL.
4) BCS partners with NFL, BCS+ hoops schools partner with NBA to secure revenue streams and to create independence from schools. Schools sell jersey sponsorships, and sign agreements to receive dollars from pro sports teams, to supplement revenue streams open up video game revenue again.
5) Baseball/Olympic/Title IX sports are kept under intercollegiate/NCAA umbrella and continue to compete under old rules.
Times are changing and anyone that doesn't believe that is a fool. CFB and CBB support the professional sports in FB and BB. They need these athletes for there fame to help support a fan following in pro-sports. Colleges need pro-sports, because this is what entices the top recruits to play for them. Along with millions of dollars in athletic amenities paid for by fan support.
-
There is absolutely no way that there is enough revenue for every D1 school to simultaneously maintain compliance with Title IX and pay revenue sport athletes. We are already at the point of no return with the arms race on facilities. The decoupling of basketball and football from the rest of the university will save athletic depts. and universities from the financial doom that is knocking at their doorstep.
it's somewhat silly that these sports are affiliated with universities in the first place.
-
There is absolutely no way that there is enough revenue for every D1 school to simultaneously maintain compliance with Title IX and pay revenue sport athletes. We are already at the point of no return with the arms race on facilities. The decoupling of basketball and football from the rest of the university will save athletic depts. and universities from the financial doom that is knocking at their doorstep.
Again I agree. There is to much money involved to let this thing go. They got to do something to keep the other sports from killing off income.
-
I really think that Football and Basketball athletes should be in a "Sports Program" separate from the school and AD. The "Sports Program" could have courses provided to the athletes, but not as a degree program. That way the "Sports Program" could profit off the value of the athletes and be self supportive. Also, a small amount of money could be paid to all the players. Then when they finish the required four year program, a stipend or scholarship for a Bachelor Degree program would be awarded.
-
Give all SAs $5-8/hour (flexible here, I'm not going to run the math on it) for hours they're mandated to be doing athlete stuff (maybe all including games/travel, maybe just the practice times, I don't know) that they could otherwise be working jobs or enjoying college.
-
Give all SAs $5-8/hour (flexible here, I'm not going to run the math on it) for hours they're mandated to be doing athlete stuff (maybe all including games/travel, maybe just the practice times, I don't know) that they could otherwise be working jobs or enjoying college.
That's what the problem is. Schools can't afford to pay all SA's.
-
Give all SAs $5-8/hour (flexible here, I'm not going to run the math on it) for hours they're mandated to be doing athlete stuff (maybe all including games/travel, maybe just the practice times, I don't know) that they could otherwise be working jobs or enjoying college.
That's what the problem is. Schools can't afford to pay all SA's.
I don't know if that's true. If it is, reduce the amount to make it work out or have different amounts based on revenue for the sports. Get some exemption to title 9 passed based on everyone wanting it because some money's better than no money.
That seems fair to all and seems to keeps a level playing field or at least the perception of one.
Or go full-blown free market and have the richest, biggest fanbase schools survive or do nothing and have college sports basically blown up in time. I'd have way more free time if college sports basically ceased to exist.
-
Give all SAs $5-8/hour (flexible here, I'm not going to run the math on it) for hours they're mandated to be doing athlete stuff (maybe all including games/travel, maybe just the practice times, I don't know) that they could otherwise be working jobs or enjoying college.
That's what the problem is. Schools can't afford to pay all SA's.
I don't know if that's true. If it is, reduce the amount to make it work out or have different amounts based on revenue for the sports. Get some exemption to title 9 passed based on everyone wanting it because some money's better than no money.
That seems fair to all and seems to keeps a level playing field or at least the perception of one.
Or go full-blown free market and have the richest, biggest fanbase schools survive or do nothing and have college sports basically blown up in time. I'd have way more free time if college sports basically ceased to exist.
It isn't. Do you think schools can give out $28-$50 thousand dollars to all SA's and not be able to add a few bucks to that. It's laughable that these same schools can afford to pay coaching staffs millions, but not be able to afford some extra spending money. I just mentioned that because of all the idiots that think this would bankrupt an AD.
-
I'd have way more free time if college sports basically ceased to exist.
This is how you win the game.
-
There is absolutely no way that there is enough revenue for every D1 school to simultaneously maintain compliance with Title IX and pay revenue sport athletes. We are already at the point of no return with the arms race on facilities. The decoupling of basketball and football from the rest of the university will save athletic depts. and universities from the financial doom that is knocking at their doorstep.
The automatic qualifier schools can. Basketball and football cannot and will not be decoupled from anything. What is most likely to happen, and the wheels are already in motion for this, is for a fourth subdivision to be added to Division 1. The fourth subdivision will be the subdivision that will offer full cost of living.
-
Should have stayed out of this thread. You guys are way too smart for me. But I am glad that the conversation moved from if we should pay them to logistics of paying them.
-
The decoupling thing isn't going to happen. That would be the point where they would fail to be college sports at all and you'd lose the things that people like about college sports in the first place. You'd lose the charade of amatuerism that allow people to feel good about their donations. You'd also probably lose tax favored status for both the programs and their donars. Essentially you'd be turning college football and bball into minor league sports and people don't like minor league sports. You think somebody is going to donate millions of dollars to some minor league team loosely affiliated with a school?
-
Give all SAs $5-8/hour (flexible here, I'm not going to run the math on it) for hours they're mandated to be doing athlete stuff (maybe all including games/travel, maybe just the practice times, I don't know) that they could otherwise be working jobs or enjoying college.
this seems as logical as any solution.
-
The decoupling thing isn't going to happen. That would be the point where they would fail to be college sports at all and you'd lose the things that people like about college sports in the first place. You'd lose the charade of amatuerism that allow people to feel good about their donations. You'd also probably lose tax favored status for both the programs and their donars. Essentially you'd be turning college football and bball into minor league sports and people don't like minor league sports. You think somebody is going to donate millions of dollars to some minor league team loosely affiliated with a school?
This. Hence the pretextual arguments for not paying athletes. They conclude that they don't want the current product (which is awesome btw) to change and then rationalize a hundred reasons to support the conclusion. Instead of weighing all of the facts and then reaching a conclusion.
-
There is absolutely no way that there is enough revenue for every D1 school to simultaneously maintain compliance with Title IX and pay revenue sport athletes. We are already at the point of no return with the arms race on facilities. The decoupling of basketball and football from the rest of the university will save athletic depts. and universities from the financial doom that is knocking at their doorstep.
The automatic qualifier schools can. Basketball and football cannot and will not be decoupled from anything. What is most likely to happen, and the wheels are already in motion for this, is for a fourth subdivision to be added to Division 1. The fourth subdivision will be the subdivision that will offer full cost of living.
This is what I have been saying. :cheers:
-
Katdaddy has owned this thread harder than marcus foster has owned andrew wiggins at college basketball.
-
Katdaddy has owned this thread harder than marcus foster has owned andrew wiggins at college basketball.
:blush:
-
I think the unionization at Northwestern is interesting. From what I can tell, they are just looking to be represented at the table when decisions on things like concussion protocol are discussed, and I think that is more than fair.
-
Just watched "Schooled: The price of college sports". It's pretty good and it's on netflix. Would recommend to anyone still on the fence.
Also didn't know Bill Self has said we should pay players stipends multiple times. Kinda wish LHCBS would say the same, would be funny to gauge tucks reactions.
-
Also, this is a very strange thread title. You're strange, katdaddy.
-
Also, this is a very strange thread title. You're strange, katdaddy.
You can thank the MODS for the thread title. :comeatme:
-
This is a tough debate, with valid points on either side, but can we all agree that one argument that is absolutely stupid is the 4 thousand versions of: "Why don't they do what I did, take out some loans and live beyond my means."
Because the system under which the majority of us had to get our college education is so great as is, let's compel some others to take on massive debt, that the government profits from, so they can find themselves some meddling job to pay the bills. Great plan. These are morally bankrupt political arguments.
-
This is a tough debate, with valid points on either side, but can we all agree that one argument that is absolutely stupid is the 4 thousand versions of: "Why don't they do what I did, take out some loans and live beyond my means."
Because the system under which the majority of us had to get our college education is so great as is, let's compel some others to take on massive debt, that the government profits from, so they can find themselves some meddling job to pay the bills. Great plan. These are morally bankrupt political arguments.
It's just plain ole jealousy, Cleveland. :th_twocents:
-
Is this the place where we talk about the ridiculous OU pasta thing?
I hope the NCAA sees right through their bullshit and finds real violations
-
Is this the place where we talk about the ridiculous OU pasta thing?
I hope the NCAA sees right through their bullshit and finds real violations
:popcorn:
-
Give me some 'tails
-
Give me some 'tails
:thumbs:
-
i guess theres a NCAA rule defining how much food you can serve a person before you're crossing into "impermissible benefits"
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10484741/oklahoma-sooners-penalized-three-student-athletes-eating-too-much-pasta (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10484741/oklahoma-sooners-penalized-three-student-athletes-eating-too-much-pasta)
OU self reported a violation of this rule, the NCAA waved it as not being an actual violation, but that hasn't stopped the rattling heads from doing double-barrel-rolls all over the place with snark.
Add the end of the day, the NCAA is a huge bureaucratic institution, so its lousy with stupid rules and regulations.
-
(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.bleacherreport.net%2Fimg%2Fimages%2Fphotos%2F002%2F804%2F752%2Ff8339dd36cddbed9439e4c97bd321099_crop_north.jpg%3Fw%3D630%26amp%3Bh%3D420%26amp%3Bq%3D75&hash=845b15cde97898dfef6568562ee88cdddb77c883)
Sports Labor Attorney Jeffrey Kessler Files Suit Against NCAA
By Brian Leigh , Featured Columnist
Mar 17, 2014
One of the top sports labor lawyers in the world, Jeffrey Kessler, filed an antitrust claim against the NCAA and five conferences Monday in a New Jersey federal court, arguing on behalf of his clients—college basketball and football players—that an academic scholarship is unjust compensation for the excess of revenue they create.
Kessler explained his case to Tom Farrey of ESPN.com:
“The main objective is to strike down permanently the restrictions that prevent athletes in Division I basketball and the top tier of college football from being fairly compensated for the billions of dollars in revenues that they help generate. In no other business—and college sports is big business—would it ever be suggested that the people who are providing the essential services work for free. Only in big-time college sports is that line drawn.”
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which has been filed against the NCAA and its five power conferences—the SEC, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC and Pac-12—are four current college athletes: Rutgers senior basketball player J.J. Moore, Clemson junior defensive back Martin Jenkins, Cal tight end Bill Tyndall and UTEP tight end Kevin Perry.
This is a significant development. Farrey calls the filing "the most direct challenge yet to the NCAA's longstanding economic model," and it's not hard to see why. Kessler is one of the highest-profile lawyers in the field and called the case "a frontal attack on the basic unfairness of the system," according to George Schroeder of USA Today.
Per Farrey, a similar claim had been filed last month by a Seattle-based firm "on behalf of former West Virginia running back Shawne Alston." However, that case is less aggressive, does not have current athletes as its plaintiffs and is not being spearheaded by a legal shark like Kessler.
This move comes at a pioneering time for college football. In February, former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter requested that the National Labor Relations Board declare student-athletes employees of the university. It's the first move toward starting a players' union for college athletes.
Kessler's legal team includes a former member of the NCAA, Tim Nevius. Formerly one of the organization's top rule-violations investigators—Nevius is the one former Ohio State head coach Jim Tressel admitted his wrongdoing to before getting fired—he might give the plaintiffs a valuable conduit regarding how the NCAA is run, where it might be vulnerable, where the bodies might be buried, etc.
Whether this claim is successful remains to be seen. Either way, cases like this, the Ed O'Bannon lawsuit and the Northwestern players' attempt to unionize show a clear trend toward rebellion against the status quo of the NCAA system.
As Andy Staples of Sports Illustrated puts it, the lawyers "smell blood (in the water)":
-
Can we like summarize this? So I dont have to read an article I am not interested about and just get the facts?
-
I'm not sure if this is relevant. . but the above article made me think of it. I currently work as a server at a restaurant. The minimum wage for servers ( $2.13/hr) has not gone up in close to ten years. This wage essentially goes to cover taxes (which it doesnt. my fellow employees and I pay in every year around this time. One fellow employee who works full time at the restaurant payed $2000 in taxes this year.) Now you could argue that the value of a restaurant is based on its food. I can agree. But, without the servers peddling the food it wouldn't sell etc. So invariably, these employees are working for free. Their only profit comes from commission compensation that is determined by the customer. So if the customer spends $50 they could tip $10 or they could tip $0 based off of the server's performance. There is no guarantee of pay.
Now how is this tied in to our current discussion? In both situations you have an "employee" who drives the revenue without getting paid by the institution. The interesting comparison to me is that since the government recognizes this practice for restaurants as legal, why can't athletes be paid extra based upon their performance? If they work hard and put in the time to know the menu/playbook they will do better. When they do better they are compensated better. Yet at the end of the day the student athlete is guaranteed a meal plan and an education. All a server is guaranteed is a chance to make money, maybe.
Thoughts?
-
well, im guessing your restaurant friends make more than $2000 in cash tips they don't report to the IRS as their wages because they are cash tips.
-
well, im guessing your restaurant friends make more than $2000 in cash tips they don't report to the IRS as their wages because they are cash tips.
Fair point. It is a responsibility to save and pay those taxes. But even without that as part of the discussion, they are not receiving a wage from the restaurant. That is the comparison to student athletes that I was making.
-
Didn't you go to college for like, seven years?
-
well, im guessing your restaurant friends make more than $2000 in cash tips they don't report to the IRS as their wages because they are cash tips.
Fair point. It is a responsibility to save and pay those taxes. But even without that as part of the discussion, they are not receiving a wage from the restaurant. That is the comparison to student athletes that I was making.
yeah I didn't really read that I just thought id remind you that most people who receive tips don't report it if they are cash and thus I don't feel bad when the IRS is like hey you owe me some scrilla.
-
Didn't you go to college for like, seven years?
Six to be exact. . .but unfortunately while not relevant it appears I won't be hearing anyone's opinion on my point. :buh-bye:
-
you do receive a wage from the restaurant tho. and then you make bank on tips. your whining is getting in the way of your point.
-
and super lol that you think servers are the most important part of a restaurant. i couldn't give a crap if a server is the best ever, if the food is good i'll go, if the food sucks i won't. jesus christ you have a really inflated sense of yourself.
can someone link that "posters you wish wouldn't post anymore" thread?
-
and super lol that you think servers are the most important part of a restaurant. i couldn't give a crap if a server is the best ever, if the food is good i'll go, if the food sucks i won't. jesus christ you have a really inflated sense of yourself.
can someone link that "posters you wish wouldn't post anymore" thread?
yea we all know the real answer to that. no respect, ever.
-
and super lol that you think servers are the most important part of a restaurant. i couldn't give a crap if a server is the best ever, if the food is good i'll go, if the food sucks i won't. jesus christ you have a really inflated sense of yourself.
can someone link that "posters you wish wouldn't post anymore" thread?
yea we all know the real answer to that. no respect, ever.
seriously. like this one place i go to a lot gets my order wrong like at least 75 percent of the time, but when it finally comes out of the kitchen right it's like man, this is rough ridin' tasty, i love this place!
-
It's weird that ydarg is one of a relatively few poster's jobs I know.
-
and super lol that you think servers are the most important part of a restaurant. i couldn't give a crap if a server is the best ever, if the food is good i'll go, if the food sucks i won't. jesus christ you have a really inflated sense of yourself.
can someone link that "posters you wish wouldn't post anymore" thread?
yea we all know the real answer to that. no respect, ever.
seriously. like this one place i go to a lot gets my order wrong like at least 75 percent of the time, but when it finally comes out of the kitchen right it's like man, this is rough ridin' tasty, i love this place!
:lol:
-
and super lol that you think servers are the most important part of a restaurant. i couldn't give a crap if a server is the best ever, if the food is good i'll go, if the food sucks i won't. jesus christ you have a really inflated sense of yourself.
can someone link that "posters you wish wouldn't post anymore" thread?
yea we all know the real answer to that. no respect, ever.
seriously. like this one place i go to a lot gets my order wrong like at least 75 percent of the time, but when it finally comes out of the kitchen right it's like man, this is rough ridin' tasty, i love this place!
:lol:
:shy:
-
you do receive a wage from the restaurant tho. and then you make bank on tips. your whining is getting in the way of your point.
I had a thought while working last night on this point. "Make bank on tips" is relative and isn't always true. And to the "you don't claim all your tips" point? That is only on cash tips. The vast majority of tips are credit card these days an all of those are claimed automatically.
In all fairness I didn't mean to say servers are the most important part of the restaurant. But, I do believe they are integral or you won't receive much return business. I have worked at a corporate restaurant where the food was meh and it made my job a lot more difficult. So I do understand the point that when the food is amazing if I make a mistake it is much less likely to effect the overall opinion of the customer.
Whereas you say you would return to a place with lousy service and great food, wouldn't you rather go somewhere that excelled in both aspects?
Now back to the point I was making. If you compare the $2.13 an hour to the benefits we have discussed on this board that SA get, then the tips that a server "makes bank on" is relative to money that could be received by the players. How inconceivable would it be for a SA to have performance standards they had to reach in order to receive the extra money for "going on dates" or "living the college lifestyle" as many posters have spelled out on this topic? My comparing it to waiting tables is only to show that there is already a federally approved standard for that method of payment.
-
lets forget about your point here and talk more about you whining about your job.
-
lets forget about your point here and talk more about you whining about your job.
haha dangit! well, whatever makes you happy :cheers:
-
do you think you make more than $2000 in cash tips throughout the year?
-
do you think you make more than $2000 in cash tips throughout the year?
It is possible. I did talk to someone who is a bit more money savvy then I am and he had an interesting suggestion. If I take a little bit out each weekend and put into an account that accrues interest I can actually make profit on my paid in taxes. It isn't a horrific situation by any means, it is just nicer when you work a 8-5 and they take it out for you and when March rolls around you owe very little or none at all.
-
do you think you make more than $2000 in cash tips throughout the year?
It is possible. I did talk to someone who is a bit more money savvy then I am and he had an interesting suggestion. If I take a little bit out each weekend and put into an account that accrues interest I can actually make profit on my paid in taxes. It isn't a horrific situation by any means, it is just nicer when you work a 8-5 and they take it out for you and when March rolls around you owe very little or none at all.
yes, saving money is a good idea. youll pay taxes on that interest the account makes the next year, tho. sounds to me like youre going to be paying taxes the rest of your life.
-
do you think you make more than $2000 in cash tips throughout the year?
It is possible. I did talk to someone who is a bit more money savvy then I am and he had an interesting suggestion. If I take a little bit out each weekend and put into an account that accrues interest I can actually make profit on my paid in taxes. It isn't a horrific situation by any means, it is just nicer when you work a 8-5 and they take it out for you and when March rolls around you owe very little or none at all.
yes, saving money is a good idea. youll pay taxes on that interest the account makes the next year, tho. sounds to me like youre going to be paying taxes the rest of your life.
The only two things we can be sure of in life, death and taxes.
-
ydarg, you made your supposed 'point' about the government saying that this type of compensation is legal. What is the world does that have to do with the NCAA deciding whether compensating players is within its rules?
-
ydarg, you made your supposed 'point' about the government saying that this type of compensation is legal. What is the world does that have to do with the NCAA deciding whether compensating players is within its rules?
I guess I misunderstood the process. I thought they were looking to change their rules? I also know that the government has an invested interest in all things NCAA FB since they were attempting to weigh in on the playoff debate. Is paying the players something that is seen as within the law but the NCAA just hasn't previously wanted to allow it?
-
ydarg, you made your supposed 'point' about the government saying that this type of compensation is legal. What is the world does that have to do with the NCAA deciding whether compensating players is within its rules?
I guess I misunderstood the process. I thought they were looking to change their rules? I also know that the government has an invested interest in all things NCAA FB since they were attempting to weigh in on the playoff debate. Is paying the players something that is seen as within the law but the NCAA just hasn't previously wanted to allow it?
Yes, there is no law against paying players. It is an NCAA rule.
-
Thx. 8manpick for getting this thread back on track. :cheers:
-
So, all comparisons to other things aside. Would there be a fair and economic way to give compensation for SA meeting specific goals in their season? Similar to bonuses that coaches get for making a bowl game etc. ? The idea being that this is your job and we are giving you education, meals, and housing as payment. If you want a bonus, show us what you can do on the field. There would have to be regulation by the NCAA about how much could actually be given to any one player, but it could be up to the individual schools to determine the criteria the athletes needed to achieve to get their "bonus".
-
you could replace 99 percent of "servers" with an ipad for ordering and a dog trained to refill drinks and it would improve my restaurant experience.
-
you could replace 99 percent of "servers" with an ipad for ordering and a dog trained to refill drinks and it would improve my restaurant experience.
Because dogs are :love:
-
I solved this almost 2 months ago.
-
I solved this almost 2 months ago.
Yea, but it's fun to hear all the crazy ideas people have about a multi billion dollar sport unable to pay kids for the value they bring to the AD. :bartender:
-
you could replace 99 percent of "servers" with an ipad for ordering and a dog trained to refill drinks and it would improve my restaurant experience.
I think logistics call for a monkey. No offense to dogs, but that opposable thumb comes in handy. Oh! And they could wear little monkey tuxedos.
-
So, all comparisons to other things aside. Would there be a fair and economic way to give compensation for SA meeting specific goals in their season? Similar to bonuses that coaches get for making a bowl game etc. ? The idea being that this is your job and we are giving you education, meals, and housing as payment. If you want a bonus, show us what you can do on the field. There would have to be regulation by the NCAA about how much could actually be given to any one player, but it could be up to the individual schools to determine the criteria the athletes needed to achieve to get their "bonus".
I don't think you were making a valid comparison in the first place. Servers in a restaurant are cogs in a machine that are completely replaceable. Show me a chilis that went belly up bc a bartender decided to quit and finish up that degree in physics. SAs should be viewed as skilled labor. Talent (or lack thereof) at their positions will absolutely have a meaningful impact on the success of the program.
-
So, all comparisons to other things aside. Would there be a fair and economic way to give compensation for SA meeting specific goals in their season? Similar to bonuses that coaches get for making a bowl game etc. ? The idea being that this is your job and we are giving you education, meals, and housing as payment. If you want a bonus, show us what you can do on the field. There would have to be regulation by the NCAA about how much could actually be given to any one player, but it could be up to the individual schools to determine the criteria the athletes needed to achieve to get their "bonus".
I don't think you were making a valid comparison in the first place. Servers in a restaurant are cogs in a machine that are completely replaceable. Show me a chilis that went belly up bc a bartender decided to quit and finish up that degree in physics. SAs should be viewed as skilled labor. Talent (or lack thereof) at their positions will absolutely have a meaningful impact on the success of the program.
Entirely true. I think my initial comparison was so people could get an idea of what I was implying by a performance based compensation. . . and it got off track. Though in counterpoint to your argument if we aren't talking five stars here, if a SA leaves a school they are replaceable. Not as easily as your example, but there has to be some amount of accountability on the athlete and not an expectation that they are irreplaceable. Though Snyder has proven (most recently with Bryce Brown) that he cares very little about how good his team could be if you don't meet his expectations.
-
Well this thread has turned into a train wreck dumpster fire.
Ydarg has my vote for "cutest" poster. Cute in the way that mentally handicapped kid in high school was. You know, the one that everyone patronized and thought they were just "being nice and helping".
-
Well this thread has turned into a train wreck dumpster fire.
Ydarg has my vote for "cutest" poster. Cute in the way that mentally handicapped kid in high school was. You know, the one that everyone patronized and thought they were just "being nice and helping".
:nono:
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize)
:horrorsurprise:
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize)
:horrorsurprise:
I didn't realize the NLRB ruling only applies to private universities and not to public.
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize)
:horrorsurprise:
This is a big, big start of something that should have happened twenty years ago.
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize)
:horrorsurprise:
:facepalm:
-
Employees get paid, you guys.
-
Also, the first strike is going to be hilarious in the media.
-
Employees get paid, you guys.
Unless they are volunteers. Then they aren't really employees at all. On the bright side, a whole lot of scabs are going to get quality educations.
-
Employees get paid, you guys.
Unless they are volunteers. Then they aren't really employees at all. On the bright side, a whole lot of scabs are going to get quality educations.
Do players in the NFL all get the same pay? So what makes you think the whole football team will receive the same pay.
-
this could ruin college football :frown:
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10677763/northwestern-wildcats-football-players-win-bid-unionize)
:horrorsurprise:
I didn't realize the NLRB ruling only applies to private universities and not to public.
Public employee unions and unions at private companies are subject to different rules/regulations.
-
Does Jon Erskine post here? I want to PI him but I need more than 140 characters
-
I can't wait to see their faces when they get their W2's in the mail.What does a year's worth of tuition, room, and board come to at NW? How about transportation compensation? Taxable?
-
Does Jon Erskine post here? I want to PI him but I need more than 140 characters
No, but I completed a twitter argument with him once by leaving a fire oscar calendar magnet stuck on a light pole at the "Great Mall" in Olathe for him to pick up.
-
Yep IF tuition to say NW, food, shelter, etc. etc. are taxable, than those guys can expect to get a relevant tax document into the 6 figures.
-
They're claiming to be employees, employees get paid, you get paid you pay taxes. They're compensation for this year would be $57,108. Standard deduction is $6200, so tax on $50,908 would be about $8600 for federal, and a good chunk for Illinois state income, about 5%, would be $2500. So they will need to come up with about $11,000 plus some FICA and such.
-
They're claiming to be employees, employees get paid, you get paid you pay taxes. They're compensation for this year would be $57,108. Standard deduction is $6200, so tax on $50,908 would be about $8600 for federal, and a good chunk for Illinois state income, about 5%, would be $2500. So they will need to come up with about $11,000 plus some FICA and such.
But I don't think they would unionize if they felt like their value as players was equal in return to the education they received through their scholarship. The problem is that these players think that they should get a slice of the supposed millions of dollars that the university makes off of them, and in the case of NW these players think that slice is bigger than $57,108.
IMO part of the issue not being discussed much is that universities have failed to adequately promote the value of the educations they provide and the positive investments on peoples lives that they offer...It's been purely turned into a set-in-stone value determined by how much tuition happens to cost at the moment.
-
They're claiming to be employees, employees get paid, you get paid you pay taxes. They're compensation for this year would be $57,108. Standard deduction is $6200, so tax on $50,908 would be about $8600 for federal, and a good chunk for Illinois state income, about 5%, would be $2500. So they will need to come up with about $11,000 plus some FICA and such.
I think they would only be on the hook for their stipend, though. Tuition, books, and other education-related expenses are tax-deductable.
-
Does a non-athlete student, who is receiving a full scholarship, account for it on their taxes?
-
Does a non-athlete student, who is receiving a full scholarship, account for it on their taxes?
I don't think they are considered unionized employees of the school.
-
Not unionized, but plenty of kids are employed by the uni.
-
Not unionized, but plenty of kids are employed by the uni.
If you work as a student, you will get a W-2 from the university, and therefore be expected to pay taxes, or at least file them.
-
The ruling states that they are employees of the school, so I would assume that all of there compensation will be subject to the same income taxes as any other university employee. They will need to be patriotic and pay their fair share. IRS will be all over this.
-
Players unionize
DERBY, Kan. -
The National Labor Relations Board in the Chicago district ruled in favor of Northwestern University football players who want to unionize and be considered university employees.
Former Kansas State Wildcat Brandon Clark says it's nothing new for college athletes to consider whether they should get paid for playing.
"There are a lot of hours that get put in behind the scenes," Clark says. "We probably talked about when we were young, but we were young."
But that's what the Northwestern players asked for and got.
"The goal is to get the players a voice," former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter says. "We don't have a voice--it's a dictatorship where everything is put on us without our input."
The players say their main concerns are medical coverage even for former players, better concussion prevention, higher graduation rates and compensation for commercial sponsorships.
-
Not unionized, but plenty of kids are employed by the uni.
If you work as a student, you will get a W-2 from the university, and therefore be expected to pay taxes, or at least file them.
Yes, but a kid on a full ride that also empties trash cans in Bluemont Hall doesn't declare his scholarship, just his trashcan earnings(not Jamar related).
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
-
<iframe width="480" height="270" allowfullscreen="true" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight='0' scrolling="no" src="http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D">
Another opinion from a college football player.
-
Not unionized, but plenty of kids are employed by the uni.
If you work as a student, you will get a W-2 from the university, and therefore be expected to pay taxes, or at least file them.
Yes, but a kid on a full ride that also empties trash cans in Bluemont Hall doesn't declare his scholarship, just his trashcan earnings(not Jamar related).
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
Yeah. Football players and other athletes wouldn't have to declare their scholarships. They would probably have to declare their stipends, though.
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
-
Not unionized, but plenty of kids are employed by the uni.
If you work as a student, you will get a W-2 from the university, and therefore be expected to pay taxes, or at least file them.
Yes, but a kid on a full ride that also empties trash cans in Bluemont Hall doesn't declare his scholarship, just his trashcan earnings(not Jamar related).
Sent from my KFTT using Tapatalk
Yeah. Football players and other athletes wouldn't have to declare their scholarships. They would probably have to declare their stipends, though.
Can it still be considered a scholarship if they are employees of the school, or is it simply compensation for employment?
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
I worked at Derby Dining Center in college. I saw the platters the football players were eating from compared to the usual plates the rest of the students used. Everyone has time constraints, surely the AD is allowing athletes time to eat. I'm not arguing that players don't deserve to get paid. Also, children of faculty members is a job benefit for the faculty member. I could make the same argument about Tate getting an athletic scholarship.
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
I worked at Derby Dining Center in college. I saw the platters the football players were eating from compared to the usual plates the rest of the students used. Everyone has time constraints, surely the AD is allowing athletes time to eat. I'm not arguing that players don't deserve to get paid. Also, children of faculty members is a job benefit for the faculty member. I could make the same argument about Tate getting an athletic scholarship.
Good points.. Lets try it this way. Who do you think finacially benefited the most Collin Klein or KSU athletics? Im sure he would trade his schoolie and Derby meals for a fair share of that BCS money. Every adult involved are gettin paid handsomely while he visits the training room. Half those injuries have not even caught up to him yet.
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
I worked at Derby Dining Center in college. I saw the platters the football players were eating from compared to the usual plates the rest of the students used. Everyone has time constraints, surely the AD is allowing athletes time to eat. I'm not arguing that players don't deserve to get paid. Also, children of faculty members is a job benefit for the faculty member. I could make the same argument about Tate getting an athletic scholarship.
Good points.. Lets try it this way. Who do you think finacially benefited the most Collin Klein or KSU athletics? Im sure he would trade his schoolie and Derby meals for a fair share of that BCS money. Every adult involved are gettin paid handsomely while he visits the training room. Half those injuries have not even caught up to him yet.
Have you ever benefited more financially than your employer at any job you have ever worked?
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=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%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
I worked at Derby Dining Center in college. I saw the platters the football players were eating from compared to the usual plates the rest of the students used. Everyone has time constraints, surely the AD is allowing athletes time to eat. I'm not arguing that players don't deserve to get paid. Also, children of faculty members is a job benefit for the faculty member. I could make the same argument about Tate getting an athletic scholarship.
Good points.. Lets try it this way. Who do you think finacially benefited the most Collin Klein or KSU athletics? Im sure he would trade his schoolie and Derby meals for a fair share of that BCS money. Every adult involved are gettin paid handsomely while he visits the training room. Half those injuries have not even caught up to him yet.
Have you ever benefited more financially than your employer at any job you have ever worked?
Klein was not and employee!!! Right???
He should have been!!!
-
no one is making these athletes suffer through hungry nights or stick through long practices. they are free to go and leave their education behind, or not take the deal at all. if kids will leave, 100 more will be clamoring to fill their place. supply demand, free market, etc.
-
no one is making these athletes suffer through hungry nights or stick through long practices. they are free to go and leave their education behind, or not take the deal at all. if kids will leave, 100 more will be clamoring to fill their place. supply demand, free market, etc.
Except it's not.
:facepalm:
-
Serious question, do any other minor leagues have unions?
-
:curse:
-
Another opinion from a college football player. (http://hub.video.msn.com/embed/d52d2de6-e5e4-4a4f-a5a4-863e1e9ef394/?vars=YnJhbmQ9Zm94c3BvcnRzJmxpbmtiYWNrPWh0dHAlM0ElMkYlMkZ3d3cuYmluZy5jb20lMkZ2aWRlb3MmY29uZmlnQ3NpZD1NU05WaWRlbyZta3Q9ZW4tdXMmc3luZGljYXRpb249dGFnJmxpbmtvdmVycmlkZTI9aHR0cCUzQSUyRiUyRm1zbi5mb3hzcG9ydHMuY29tJTJGc291dGh3ZXN0JTJGc3RvcnklMkZ0ZXhhbnMtbGVhdmUtbWFuemllbC1zLXByby1kYXktaW1wcmVzc2VkLTAzMjcxNCUzRnZpZGVvSWQlM0QlN0IwJTdEJTI2ZnJvbSUzRG1wbF9lbi11c19GU1JTaW5nbGVfRk9YU3BvcnRzX1ZpZGVvX1BhZ2UlMjZzcmMlM0R2NSUyNTNhc2hhcmUlMjUzYXRpdGxlQmFyJTI1NWVsaW5rJTI1M2ElMjUyY3Y1JTI1M2Fwb3N0ZXJmcmFtZSUyNTNhdGl0bGVCYXIlMjU1ZWxpbmslMjUzYSZmcj1zaGFyZWVtYmVkLXN5bmRpY2F0aW9uJmNvbmZpZ05hbWU9c3luZGljYXRpb25wbGF5ZXI%3D)
These athletes are on a complete meal plan. Someone who knows better than I do, how could they have "hungry nights"?? I'm trying to quantify what even one meal might cost. A loaf of bread and some peanut butter and a bunch of bananas. That could last you four meals and that's what? Five dollars?
Training table. :Woohoo:
Coach: "Hello, Johnny Recruit. Did you know these other schools' players have Hungry Nights? Have you heard of that? They don't have any FOOD! Well, don't you worry: at K-State we'll make sure you have food to eat."
Training table closes at 6:30pm and studay hall starts at 7pm... This is all after athletes spent the rest of the day at practice, lifting, flim and oh yeah class. Ofcourse they deserve to get paid. The child of a faculty member gets to go to school for free. That person is not bringing in one dime!!! The only reason KSU can afford to pay its coaches is because we pay to see the players play.
I worked at Derby Dining Center in college. I saw the platters the football players were eating from compared to the usual plates the rest of the students used. Everyone has time constraints, surely the AD is allowing athletes time to eat. I'm not arguing that players don't deserve to get paid. Also, children of faculty members is a job benefit for the faculty member. I could make the same argument about Tate getting an athletic scholarship.
Good points.. Lets try it this way. Who do you think finacially benefited the most Collin Klein or KSU athletics? Im sure he would trade his schoolie and Derby meals for a fair share of that BCS money. Every adult involved are gettin paid handsomely while he visits the training room. Half those injuries have not even caught up to him yet.
Good point. Coach Briles said that RGIII was worth about 30 million in value he brought to Baylor.
-
NCAA, Big 12, other conferences sued over scholarship value
by The Associated Press
Former WVU football player Shawne Alston is only plaintiff
Former West Virginia football player Shawne Alston sued the NCAA and five major conferences Wednesday, saying they violated antitrust laws by agreeing to cap the value of an athletic scholarship at less than the actual cost of attending school.
Attorneys Steve Berman and oscar Simon, who have been involved in cases challenging the NCAA’s ability to sell college athletes’ likeness to video-game makers, filed the proposed class-action lawsuit in federal court in San Francisco.
Alston, a running back for West Virginia from 2009-12, is the only named plaintiff. The lawsuit also seeks to represent all scholarship football players who have played since February 2010 in the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and Southeastern Conference.
“We just received a copy of the complaint and are evaluating it as it relates to similar cases filed by the very same plaintiffs’ counsel,” NCAA chief legal officer Donald Remy said in a statement.
The lawsuits said players essentially work full-time football jobs while they go to school.
“The NCAA and Power Conference Defendants have studied and acknowledged that a so-called ‘full ride’ scholarship does not cover the full cost of attending school,” the lawsuit said. “Athletes are often a few thousand dollars short for the typical expenses of a student. These costs include money for gas, food, and other necessities. While players scrimp, coaches and universities most certainly do not. The average salary for major college football coaches is over $2 million, with some coaches earning over $7 million.”
Alston had to take out a $5,500 loan to cover the difference between his scholarship and actual costs of attendance, the lawsuit said. It said if a free market existed in major-college football, cost of attendance, and possibly more, would be included in a scholarship.
The lawsuit asks that the NCAA and the five conferences discontinue the practice of not including the actual cost of attendance in scholarships. It also asks for members of the class to receive damages in the amount of the difference between the value of their scholarships and their actual costs of attendance.
The NCAA and other power brokers already are facing challenges to the traditional model of college athletics.
Two weeks ago, the National Labor Relations Board met in Chicago to hear a request from Northwestern University football players to form what would be the first college athletes’ union in U.S. history. Attorneys suggested that the highly regimented structure of football at Northwestern, and the tight control of players’ daily lives, essentially make it a business, and the relationship of the school to the players was one of an employer to employee.
Also last month, a federal judge in Oakland, Calif., ruled former UCLA basketball player Ed O’Bannon’s class-action lawsuit against the NCAA would go to trial barring a settlement. O’Bannon’s case asks the NCAA to share with college athletes the hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue generated from the use of their likeness in video games and other media.
-
They're battling in courtrooms, and could one day meet over a bargaining table. About the only things the two sides in the debate over big-time college athletics agree on is that things are changing.
Schools bringing in hundreds of millions in television contracts. Coaches making kind of salaries that the late UCLA legend John Wooden wouldn't recognize. Athletes insisting on rights, if not outright cash.
SN's Matt Hayes: Pay for play money grab hurts players
And now a union for football players at Northwestern that would previously have been unthinkable in college sports.
A ruling that the Northwestern football team can bargain with the school as employees represented by a union may not by itself change the way amateur sports operate. But it figures to put more pressure on the NCAA and the major conferences to give something back to the players to justify the billions of dollars the players bring in — and never see.
MORE: The ruling that started it all | Former college player begs to differ
"While improvements need to be made, we do not need to completely throw away a system that has helped literally millions of students over the past decade alone attend college," The NCAA said in a statement.
There's huge money at stake — nearly $18 billion alone just in television rights for the NCAA basketball tournament and bowl games. Already fighting a flurry of antitrust lawsuits challenging its control of college athletics, the NCAA can't afford too many more defeats.
"This is a colossal victory for student athletes coming on the heels of their recent victories," said Marc Edelman, an associate professor of law at City University of New York who specializes in sports and antitrust law. "It seems not only the tide of public sentiment but also the tide of legal rulings has finally turned in the direction of college athletes and against the NCAA."
For the NCAA, the timing of a National Labor Relations Board opinion allowing a union at Northwestern couldn't have been worse. In the middle of a tournament that earns schools close to $1 billion a year, it is being taken to task not only for not paying players, but for not ensuring their health and future welfare.
Add in revelations like Florida coach Billy Donovan's new $3.7 million-a-year contract and the $18,000 bonus that Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith got for one of the school's wrestlers winning an NCAA title, and some are frustrated with the NCAA's contention that everything it does is done for the benefit of athletes who play for the glory of their school.
"Fifty years ago the NCAA invented the term student-athlete to try and make sure this day never came," said Ramogi Huma, a former UCLA linebacker and the designated president of Northwestern's would-be football players' union. "Northwestern players who stood up for their rights took a giant step for justice. It's going to set a precedent for college players across the nation to do the same."
Players union (AP Photo)
The players currently at Northwestern may have already graduated by the time the team gets a chance to bargain — if it ever does.
According to federal law, Northwestern football players have 30 days from Wednesday's decision to vote on whether to authorize the College Athletes Players Association, or CAPA, to represent them. But Northwestern is expected to appeal the landmark ruling to the National Labor Relations Board by an April 9 deadline, potentially stalling the union vote. The NCAA is also likely to continue to fight the description of college athletes as employees.
"We frequently hear from student-athletes, across all sports, that they participate to enhance their overall college experience and for the love of their sport, not to be paid," the NCAA said in a statement.
It was that love of the sport that drew outgoing Wildcats quarterback Kain Colter — as well as a scholarship worth up to about $75,000 annually. But Colter, backed by lawyers with the United Steelworkers union, began the union push after growing disenchanted with the time demands placed on him in football that forced him to drop his plans to go to medical school.
Colter also worried about the long-term health risks of football long after players have left school. Players have said they want more research into concussions and other traumatic injuries and insurance and guarantees that they will be covered for medical issues later in life. They also want money for continuing education and for schools to offer four-year scholarship deals instead of year-to-year pacts.
"If we are making sacrifices like we are, we should have these basic protections taken care of," Colter told ESPN. "With the sacrifices we make athletically, medically and with our bodies, we need to be taken care of."
One day that could mean money, over and above the $2,000 extra annual stipend that NCAA president Mark Emmert proposed but failed to get implemented over the objections of small-budget schools. There's plenty to go around, with a $10.6 billion contract for television rights to the NCAA basketball tournament and a recent $7.2 billion deal for football bowl games.
The NLRB ruling described how the life of a Northwestern football player is far more regimented than that of a typical student, down to requirements about what they can eat and whether they can live off campus or purchase a car. At times, players put 50 or 60 hours a week into football, the ruling said, qualifying them to be treated as employees of the university and eligible for a union.
By itself, the ruling could be little more than an irritant to private universities and the NCAA. But combined with the antitrust lawsuits — one filed just last week by a prominent attorney called the organization an "unlawful cartel" — they present a clear challenge to the unique way college sports operates.
The model of coaches and administrators making millions while the athletes providing the labor are paid in room and board and books is one that could be difficult to defend in court.
One of those suits, filed by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon, is scheduled for trial June 9 in California and is being carefully watched by those on both sides of the issue. O'Bannon, who led his team to the national championship in 1995, sued after seeing his likeness in a video game licensed by the NCAA without his permission.
''It's never been about monetary gain," O'Bannon told The Associated Press earlier this week. "It's all about changing the rules and making sure the players, both present and former, are represented as well."
-
The writing is on the wall. Pro Sports Farm System(NCAA) is going to have to share some of the big money they are making. You do know the NCAA was and is formed and represented by University Presidents. They're not there for the benefit of the athletes. Only those that are very naïve would think otherwise.
-
The writing is on the wall. Pro Sports Farm System(NCAA) is going to have to share some of the big money they are making. You do know the NCAA was and is formed and represented by University Presidents. They're not there for the benefit of the athletes. Only those that are very naïve would think otherwise.
It's becoming clearer and clearer
-
MORE NEWS.
COURT BATTLE POSSIBLE
The NLRB's deliberations over Northwestern's appeal could take months, including hearings and a vote by the board. If Northwestern loses before the full NLRB, it could take its case to federal court.
If the school refused to recognize any union approved by a vote of the players, the NLRB, which does not have enforcement powers, likewise could turn to a federal court under U.S. labor law.
Such obstacles virtually ensure that college sports will not be upended overnight by Ohr's decision. But in the near term, analysts say, the decision is likely to put more pressure on the NCAA to change some of its policies, including whether to offer athletes some compensation beyond their scholarships.
The Ohr decision "will put additional pressure on the NCAA to change its rules with regard to what compensation and monies can be paid to student athletes," said Joseph Farelli, a New York-based labor and employment attorney at Pitta & Giblin.
The NCAA, based in Indianapolis, already is facing questions about the adequacy of its safety protections for athletes, and discontent with rules that allow the association and its member schools to make huge profits while barring players from doing the same.
BIG BUSINESS
Northwestern's football program generated revenue of $235 million and expenses of $159 million from 2003 to 2012, according to its report to the U.S. Department of Education.
In his 24-page decision, Ohr detailed his reasons for ruling that Northwestern could be considered an employer of its roughly 85 scholarship football players. Ohr focused particularly on the restrictions the school places on players, and the time they spend on team duties compared with the time they spend doing school work.
When they agree to play for the Wildcats, Ohr noted, football recruits get a "tender" that details the terms of their scholarship offer. Outside employment, social media use and behavior are restricted. Violations can result in suspension or dismissal from the team.
Players spend 40 to 50 hours a week during the regular season practicing, playing and traveling to games, and receive scholarship assistance worth about $61,000 per year, Ohr noted.
"Not only is this more hours than many undisputed full-time employees work at their jobs, it is also many more hours than the players spend on their studies," Ohr wrote.
Ohr's conclusion may bolster nearly identical arguments made in lawsuits pending against the NCAA.
A proposed class-action anti-trust lawsuit filed last week in federal court accuses the NCAA of colluding to deprive university athletes of earning more from their sports than the value of their scholarships. Another lawsuit challenging a rule that bars players from earning money from the use of their images is expected to go to trial later this year.
Under U.S. President Barack Obama, the NLRB's board is controlled by Democrats, the political party more closely aligned with organized labor - a factor that could weigh in the Northwestern players' favor. The congressional elections in November will not change the board's makeup.
The NLRB supervises union elections and polices unfair labor practices in private-sector workplaces. Labor relations in government workplaces - including those in state-backed universities that make up the vast majority of the 120 or so schools with major football programs - are covered by separate federal and state laws not administered by the NLRB.
So Ohr's decision, even if it is upheld, would apply only to Northwestern and the 16 other private universities with major sports programs. Even so, public universities are keeping a close watch on what happens in the Northwestern case.
(Reporting by Amanda Becker in Washington; Editing by Kevin Drawbaugh, David Lindsey and Lisa Shumaker)
-
College football players have at least one influential supporter in Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who told The Washington Post, "Of course they should be able to organize. The way these people are treated by the NCAA and the universities themselves is really unpardonable, and I wish them well. I'll do anything I can to help."
Source: ESPN.com
-
College football players have at least one influential supporter in Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who told The Washington Post, "Of course they should be able to organize. The way these people are treated by the NCAA and the universities themselves is really unpardonable, and I wish them well. I'll do anything I can to help."
Source: ESPN.com
You and I know it's going to happen in the near future. Too bad the NCAA was too stupid to realize this could happen.
-
College football players have at least one influential supporter in Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who told The Washington Post, "Of course they should be able to organize. The way these people are treated by the NCAA and the universities themselves is really unpardonable, and I wish them well. I'll do anything I can to help."
Source: ESPN.com
You and I know it's going to happen in the near future. Too bad the NCAA was too stupid to realize this could happen.
Matter of time
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
-
Also, this may explain why pro soccer is not a top sport in the USA.
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
Why should that matter to universities who are interested in fielding amateur athletics programs? I would love to see the NFL develop its own farm system. It would be good for the players who aren't interested in what the universities are offering. College football doesn't need elite players to thrive. The money is made off of alumni cheering on their alma maters much moreso than it is off the backs of star players.
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
Why should that matter to universities who are interested in fielding amateur athletics programs? I would love to see the NFL develop its own farm system. It would be good for the players who aren't interested in what the universities are offering. College football doesn't need elite players to thrive. The money is made off of alumni cheering on their alma maters much moreso than it is off the backs of star players.
If that's so, then why don't the pro's draft the players from NFL Europe.
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
Why should that matter to universities who are interested in fielding amateur athletics programs? I would love to see the NFL develop its own farm system. It would be good for the players who aren't interested in what the universities are offering. College football doesn't need elite players to thrive. The money is made off of alumni cheering on their alma maters much moreso than it is off the backs of star players.
If that's so, then why don't the pro's draft the players from NFL Europe.
Are they in NFL Europe because they don't value an education, or are they there because they already got their education and weren't good enough to get drafted? Is NFL Europe even still around?
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
Why should that matter to universities who are interested in fielding amateur athletics programs? I would love to see the NFL develop its own farm system. It would be good for the players who aren't interested in what the universities are offering. College football doesn't need elite players to thrive. The money is made off of alumni cheering on their alma maters much moreso than it is off the backs of star players.
If that's so, then why don't the pro's draft the players from NFL Europe.
Are they in NFL Europe because they don't value an education, or are they there because they already got their education and weren't good enough to get drafted? Is NFL Europe even still around?
Most of them come from Europe. The NFL and NBA have a great free farm system. They don't want to lose that. If the best athletes went into a semi-pro like baseball, college football and basketball would not be very well watched. Maybe some students and relatives would enjoy the sport.
-
Serious question, do any other minor leagues have unions?
yes
-
Also, this may explain why pro soccer is not a top sport in the USA.
It should be. Some of the worlds top paid athletes are soccer players. I ran across an article the other day that had the figures and showed that like 4 of the top 15 paid athletes in the world were all soccer stars.
-
This will probably sound cold, but I don't really care. I'm all for professional leagues putting in their own requirements for professional players at their own behest. Does it suck for some athletes that they miss out on some dough by playing in college? Sure, but as a consumer I want the higher quality product. I know this is the football board, but college bball is more the focus because players generally jump much earlier.
The NBA would be a better league if it required that players went to three years of college. Players would be more mature and both the college and pro game would be better for it. They could institute all sorts of life training regiments, etc. (that they probably already still do). A lot of careers require a certain amount of education. I don't see why pro sports has to be all that different.
Only thing I would add is that they should just allow college players to make money off their own college fame.
-
This will probably sound cold, but I don't really care. I'm all for professional leagues putting in their own requirements for professional players at their own behest. Does it suck for some athletes that they miss out on some dough by playing in college? Sure, but as a consumer I want the higher quality product. I know this is the football board, but college bball is more the focus because players generally jump much earlier.
The NBA would be a better league if it required that players went to three years of college. Players would be more mature and both the college and pro game would be better for it. They could institute all sorts of life training regiments, etc. (that they probably already still do). A lot of careers require a certain amount of education. I don't see why pro sports has to be all that different.
Only thing I would add is that they should just allow college players to make money off their own college fame.
I think I've heard this somewhere; Sir Charles, maybe? :cool:
-
This will probably sound cold, but I don't really care. I'm all for professional leagues putting in their own requirements for professional players at their own behest. Does it suck for some athletes that they miss out on some dough by playing in college? Sure, but as a consumer I want the higher quality product. I know this is the football board, but college bball is more the focus because players generally jump much earlier.
The NBA would be a better league if it required that players went to three years of college. Players would be more mature and both the college and pro game would be better for it. They could institute all sorts of life training regiments, etc. (that they probably already still do). A lot of careers require a certain amount of education. I don't see why pro sports has to be all that different.
Only thing I would add is that they should just allow college players to make money off their own college fame.
I think I've heard this somewhere; Sir Charles, maybe? :cool:
You're supposed to put u digg afterwards. Chuck is what brought it to mind, but it's been the basis of my feeling for a long time. I used to like the MLB rule, but after some convos w/ some buddies it's the conclusion I've come to. The marketability money was due to the convos.
-
Maybe these athletes just shouldn't have played college football if they weren't interested in a college education. The NFL's policies and lack of a minor football league really shouldn't be any concern of a group of universities.
The NFL and NBA need the colleges for the fame. How many fans watch pro sports because of the college players they have.
Example: RGIII.
Why should that matter to universities who are interested in fielding amateur athletics programs? I would love to see the NFL develop its own farm system. It would be good for the players who aren't interested in what the universities are offering. College football doesn't need elite players to thrive. The money is made off of alumni cheering on their alma maters much moreso than it is off the backs of star players.
If that's so, then why don't the pro's draft the players from NFL Europe.
Are they in NFL Europe because they don't value an education, or are they there because they already got their education and weren't good enough to get drafted? Is NFL Europe even still around?
Most of them come from Europe. The NFL and NBA have a great free farm system. They don't want to lose that. If the best athletes went into a semi-pro like baseball, college football and basketball would not be very well watched. Maybe some students and relatives would enjoy the sport.
I don't think college football and basketball would lose much viewership. They are already vastly inferior products, and people still watch. They have established fanbases, and each school graduates thousands of lifelong fans every year. The NCAA could go the ivy league route of not allowing scholarships at all (I'm not advocating that), and I know I would still watch. I care about how good the athletes are on my team relative to other college football teams. I don't care about how good they are relative to professional athletes at all.
-
i'm already sick of hearing about this stuff and it's just starting. :dubious:
-
i'm already sick of hearing about this stuff and it's just starting. :dubious:
and here's to that:
http://msn.foxsports.com/ohio/video?related=87869390-e2f7-4d31-b43e-b77dbdadadd3&videoId=87869390-e2f7-4d31-b43e-b77dbdadadd3&from=sharepermalink&src=v5:share:sharepermalink:
:facepalm:
-
WHERE HAVE I HEARD THIS BEFORE, OH YEA, EVERY rough ridin' CEO IN THE USA; WHEN TAKING ABOUT UNIONS.
Emmert: Unionization "grossly inappropriate"
AP
APR 06, 2014 1:48p ET
Eric Gay / AP
NCAA President Mark Emmert answers a question at Sunday's news conference at the Final Four.
"http://msn.foxsports.com/college-basketball/video?vid=2425f184-b5cb-448c-b64a-3b9a4c70dcce&videoId=2425f184-b5cb-448c-b64a-3b9a4c70dcce&from=shareembed-syndication&src=v5%3ainfo%3atitleBar%5elink%3a&src=v5:embed:syndication:"
March Madness Tickets
ARLINGTON, Texas -- The NCAA president called an effort to unionize players a "grossly inappropriate" way to solve problems in college sports while insisting the association has plans to change the school-athlete relationship.
Mark Emmert said Sunday that the NCAA wants to allow the big conferences with moneymaking teams to write their own rules, and those changes could solve many athletes' complaints more effectively than unionization.
"To be perfectly frank, the notion of using a union-employee model to address the challenges that exist in intercollegiate athletics is something that strikes most people as a grossly inappropriate solution to the problems," Emmert said at his annual news conference, held the day before college basketball's national championship.
He said it would "throw away the entire collegiate model for athletics."
The NCAA has spent the last three years writing up plans to change its governance structure to allow the five biggest conferences to have different rules from hundreds of smaller schools. Because smaller schools have fought against costly changes such as paying athletes stipends, the independence of the big schools could break a logjam.
Although the issues have been simmering for years, they have drawn attention in recent weeks with a lawsuit filed by former athletes about to go to trial and a National Labor Relations Board director's ruling that Northwestern football players should be able to form a union.
If the NCAA loses the unionization fight or the lawsuit, filed by former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon, it could drastically alter the relationship between NCAA schools and 460,000 college athletes.
But, Emmert said, nothing the NCAA might do in coming months will be a direct response to either of those legal cases: "Those are conversations that have been going on for several years now," he said.
Neither Emmert nor the administrators who joined him for the news conference sounded overly concerned about drawing up contingency plans in case unions start sprouting up in the aftermath of the Northwestern case.
"There's 50 different sets of rules for 50 different states," Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby said. "So, we're a long way from having unions. I think about it a lot. Haven't spent any time talking about it. I'm not going to speculate on it. It's a long way down the road."
Bowlsby and a panel that included presidents at Wake Forest, Kansas State and the future president at Ohio State agreed that many of the NCAA's thorniest issues, including paying athletes and improving their long-term health care, could be more easily resolved if the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC were given "autonomy" to draw up their own regulations.
"I think most of Division I memberships see that we're standing at a fork in the road," Kansas State president Kirk Schulz said. "What we're going to put out there again is not perfect, but I believe that the vast majority of members recognize that some of these things must change and that we need to do it rapidly."
The idea of giving the five big conferences autonomy -- lest they splinter off from the NCAA completely -- came up about three years ago after the full membership rejected Emmert's proposal for a $2,000 stipend for athletes that would help cover the gap between the value of a scholarship and the real cost of attending school.
Smaller schools, especially those that don't play football, can't afford that sort of stipend, while the bigger ones are trying to use some sort of pay-for-play model to keep peace with a growingly discontented group of players.
The biggest cash cow for the NCAA, however, is the basketball tournament that wraps up Monday. March Madness garnered a 14-year, $10.8 billion TV contract in 2010. The deal has grown increasingly lucrative over the years in large part because the tournament affords the little schools a chance to go up against the behemoths, and sometimes come out on top.
"We are committed to keeping ourselves in this one big division because of that," said Rita Cheng, chancellor at Southern Illinois, and the only small-school representative to appear with Emmert on Sunday. "As long as we can know that we can be competitive in the tournament and that our athletes can have opportunities, it's appropriate for us to say, `Your world is different than our world.'"
Emmert and the other leaders said they were blameless for the NBA's "one and done" rule that allows basketball players to go pro after only one year in college. Kentucky has five freshmen starters and at least a few of them aren't expected to return next year.
"I've been a pretty vocal in opposition to that notion," Emmert said.
The president conceded that issue, like so many others, is beyond his control.
That's life in the NCAA, which has 351 Division I members, with many different agendas. Though Emmert disagrees with those whose legal maneuverings might undo the NCAA, he recognizes the need for some changes.
"It's a group that makes decisions in a ponderous democratic process," Emmert said. "These people to my left are trying very much to change the decision-making structure, so they can make decisions more rapidly and address things in a more real-time way."
-
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview)
"Hey, how'd he get that ride? His uncle bought it. How did his uncle buy it? Paid cash. Paid cash, how'd he do that? crap, we don't know, but here's the receipt where he paid cash, and now y'all ain't got crap. Go tell the NCAA you think we're cheating because this kid's uncle bought him a used Tahoe in cash, you racist."
-
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview)
"Hey, how'd he get that ride? His uncle bought it. How did his uncle buy it? Paid cash. Paid cash, how'd he do that? crap, we don't know, but here's the receipt where he paid cash, and now y'all ain't got crap. Go tell the NCAA you think we're cheating because this kid's uncle bought him a used Tahoe in cash, you racist."
I like how they did the images in that post.
-
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview)
"Hey, how'd he get that ride? His uncle bought it. How did his uncle buy it? Paid cash. Paid cash, how'd he do that? crap, we don't know, but here's the receipt where he paid cash, and now y'all ain't got crap. Go tell the NCAA you think we're cheating because this kid's uncle bought him a used Tahoe in cash, you racist."
I like how they did the images in that post.
Made the whole article seem extra fancy to me. :thumbsup:
-
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview (http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview)
"Hey, how'd he get that ride? His uncle bought it. How did his uncle buy it? Paid cash. Paid cash, how'd he do that? crap, we don't know, but here's the receipt where he paid cash, and now y'all ain't got crap. Go tell the NCAA you think we're cheating because this kid's uncle bought him a used Tahoe in cash, you racist."
I like how they did the images in that post.
One statement looks familiar, "Knock his rough ridin' head off"; now where have I heard that before. :ROFL:
-
You're better than this, Jon! :shakesfist:
http://deadspin.com/the-daily-show-takes-down-the-ncaa-1562165262 (http://deadspin.com/the-daily-show-takes-down-the-ncaa-1562165262)
-
You're better than this, Jon! :shakesfist:
http://deadspin.com/the-daily-show-takes-down-the-ncaa-1562165262 (http://deadspin.com/the-daily-show-takes-down-the-ncaa-1562165262)
Yeah, pretty dumpstery considering the complete lack of research and stats supporting how much money is spent on every athlete.
-
The SBNation article was a fun read, but hardly news.
-
Report States Market Value for College Football Player Is $178,000 Per Year
By Brian Leigh , Featured Columnist
Apr 14, 2014
Report States Market Value for College Football Player Is $178,000 Per Year
A March 2014 study conducted by Drexel University and the National College Players Association has found that the annual fair market value of an average college football player between 2011 and 2015 is $178,000, per Mark Coba of NBC News:
The March survey, from the National College Players Association and Drexel University, said that the projected fair market value of the average college football player is $178,000 per year from 2011 to 2015, while the projected market value for the average college basketball player for the same time is $375,000.
The report also said that football players with the top 10 highest estimated fair market values, like Texas A&M quarterback Johnny Manziel, might be worth as much as $547,000, during the year 2011 to 2012.
The NCPA was founded by Ramogi Huma, who joined forces with Kain Colter to form the College Athletes Players Association earlier this year and recently won a huge victory when the National Labor Relations Board deemed Northwestern football players were employees of—not just students at—the university, according to ESPN.com.
However, it is important to note that pay-for-play is not one of CAPA's primary, explicit goals. The organization argued in January for "cost of attendance" stipends and the right to "be compensated for commercial sponsorships consistent with evolving NCAA regulations," per Teddy Grenstein of the Chicago Tribune.
"A lot of people will think this is all about money; it’s not,” Colter said at the time. "We’re asking for a seat at the table to get our voice heard."
These newly published numbers are staggering, however, and given Huga's connection to both the NCPA and CAPA, it is reasonable to think they might be used in pro-compensation arguments in the near future.
Here are some other important findings from the report, published on the NCPA's official website:
•The average full athletic scholarship at an FBS school left “full” players with a scholarship shortfall (out-of-pocket expenses) of $3285 during the 2011-12 school year.
•FBS football and men’s basketball players would receive full athletic scholarships plus an additional $6 billion between 2011-15 if not for the NCAA’s prohibition of a fair market.
•The lost value over a four-year career for the average FBS football and men’s basketball player is $456,612 and $1,063,307, respectively.
•The lost value over a four-year career for the average football and men’s basketball player in the six BCS conferences is $715,000 and $1.5 million, respectively.
•University of Texas football players will be denied approximately $2.2 million, incur scholarship shortfalls of over $14,000, and live below the federal poverty line by $784 per year between 2011-15.
Like so many developments since the formation of CAPA in late-January, it remains to be seen how, exactly, these numbers will be used. The association is still in its early phases, teaching itself how it will operate and whom it will preside over.
Still, it seems like the days of unpaid college athletes are just about numbered. The earning potential is too big to ignore.
"The bidding war for athletes would likely be in the millions," said Ellen Staurowsky, a professor of sports management at Drexel University and co-author of the report, according to Coba's story.
For how long can we not address those numbers?
Follow Brian Leigh on Twitter: @BLeighDAT
-
what a fantastic twitter handle
-
Those numbers are absurd. I'd like to see how they were reached.
-
Those numbers are absurd. I'd like to see how they were reached.
Maybe this quote from an artical about FSU might help:
It would be difficult to overstate the importance of football to Florida State and its hometown. In Tallahassee, rooting for the Seminoles is a matter of identity and economy. The 2013 championship season generated millions of dollars for the athletic department and city businesses, and favorable publicity beyond measure.
-
Those numbers are absurd. I'd like to see how they were reached.
Maybe this quote from an artical about FSU might help:
It would be difficult to overstate the importance of football to Florida State and its hometown. In Tallahassee, rooting for the Seminoles is a matter of identity and economy. The 2013 championship season generated millions of dollars for the athletic department and city businesses, and favorable publicity beyond measure.
This could be said about every major college in a pretty densely populated town.
-
Those numbers are absurd. I'd like to see how they were reached.
comically so, like a number that would be used in an Onion article
-
:lol: AT THIS S.O.B.!!! :curse:
NCAA President Mark Emmert Held #AskEmmert Q&A, and It Didn't Go so Well
By Brian Leigh , Featured Columnist
Apr 18, 2014
NCAA President Mark Emmert appeared on ESPN's Mike & Mike radio show Friday morning, ostensibly to help clean up some of the comments he's made about college unionization over the past month.
The highlight (lowlight?) of the interview was Emmert's response to Northwestern University football players, who were recently deemed employees of the school by the National Labor Relations Board, according to Brian Bennett of ESPN.com.
In Emmert's own words:
On discussing the new change to the NCAA's food policy, whereby players can now enjoy free meals without restriction, Emmert also had a flippant reply to Connecticut basketball player Shabazz Napier, who claimed there were some hungry nights were he "goes to bed starving," per Darren Rovell of ESPN.com:
Interviews like these do not endear Emmert to the public, which is troubling because, in that respect, he is digging himself out of a perpetual hole. Perhaps, as Bill Connelly of SB Nation suggests, we've reached the point where he should stop granting interview requests altogether:
Ridiculous as those two comments were, the rest of Emmert's morning didn't go so well either. Mike & Mike prompted viewers to tweet questions for the president with the hashtag #AskEmmert, but the exercise predictably devolved into ridicule (h/t Deadspin):
Is this the last time we'll see Emmert give a candid interview? No, but it might be his farewell for a while.
Taking him off-book like this has only made the situation worse for the NCAA. However, with so much change appearing to be imminent in college athletics, now is not an ideal time for the face of the organization to disappear.
Regardless of how the NCAA manages Emmert's availability in the coming months, it's clear that the man has a difficult job. He is the public face of a disliked organization, and his duty to placate the gluttonous college presidents makes him an easy target of scorn. Because of his position, he's the easiest and most convenient NCAA figurehead to attack.
But, hey. You have to earn that $1.7 million somehow.
AND HERE'S HIS COMMENTS: :bang:
"If I can hire someone to play football for me why would I hire an 18 year old? Why not someone who plays in the CFL?" Emmert on unions
Mark Emmert on @MikeAndMike on deregulating food rules: If UConn wants to feed Shabazz breakfast in bed, they can.“
Note: You can listen to the full, 26-minute interview here.
http://cdn16.castfire.com/audio/303/2117/7825/2161632/audiomikeandmike_2014-04-18-084132-3953-0-0-0.32.mp3?cdn_id=33&uuid=5301b65709332cb06131b6fd1b0aff42&referer=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FiHwpr3WEc5
-
Those numbers are absurd. I'd like to see how they were reached.
comically so, like a number that would be used in an Onion article
I'm trying to find a copy of that report to see how they reached their numbers. None of the stories provide a link to the report and I doubt that any of the authors actually read the damn thing -- they seem to be all running the same/substantially similar wire report.
The 178k number has to be ignoring practically the entire institutional cost of running an athletic department and just taking gross revenue divided by however many scholarship players there are in the country, which if so, is psychotic.
-
players shouldn't be paid dumbasses
-
no one cares about college football outside of the southeast united states and the midwest. and no one cares about either of those areas of the country.
-
no one lives there to care either
-
hi my name is eastcat and my posts don't make any sense and i'm a racist
-
OK i found it. I tweeted at the belieghdat guy and he cited the report, which you can find here: http://www.ncpanow.org/news/articles/body/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Full.pdf (http://www.ncpanow.org/news/articles/body/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Full.pdf)
Method...
(4) College Athlete Market Value
At present, there is no formula to determine the fair market value of a revenue-producing college athlete in the sports of football and men's basketball. In an attempt to experiment with such a model, we theorized that the revenue-sharing models that exist in the NFL and NBA, which have been arrived at through a collective bargaining process and with the aid of player representation, would provide a starting point on an estimation of what the value of revenue-producing college athletes in their programs. In 2011, the NFL reached an agreement with players that they would share at least 46.5% of the revenue generated by the league, while the NBA owners agreed to a 50% revenue-sharing standard for its players. Those standards were applied to the revenue reported by colleges' and universities' football and basketball revenues to better gauge the value of the college players that participate in these sports.
So essentially she made the following calculation: Football player's FMV=((total football revenue)(0.465)/(85)).
I'm still very skeptical about how she reached her findings (avg. player is worth 178k) and the capability of smaller FBS programs to fund an endeavor like this, when practically all teams already operate in the red.
Plus she's also completely ignoring the variables that allow NFL players to leverage for 46.5%.
-
OK i found it. I tweeted at the belieghdat guy and he cited the report, which you can find here: http://www.ncpanow.org/news/articles/body/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Full.pdf (http://www.ncpanow.org/news/articles/body/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Full.pdf)
Method...
(4) College Athlete Market Value
At present, there is no formula to determine the fair market value of a revenue-producing college athlete in the sports of football and men's basketball. In an attempt to experiment with such a model, we theorized that the revenue-sharing models that exist in the NFL and NBA, which have been arrived at through a collective bargaining process and with the aid of player representation, would provide a starting point on an estimation of what the value of revenue-producing college athletes in their programs. In 2011, the NFL reached an agreement with players that they would share at least 46.5% of the revenue generated by the league, while the NBA owners agreed to a 50% revenue-sharing standard for its players. Those standards were applied to the revenue reported by colleges' and universities' football and basketball revenues to better gauge the value of the college players that participate in these sports.
So essentially she made the following calculation: Football player's FMV=((total football revenue)(0.465)/(85)).
I'm still very skeptical about how she reached her findings (avg. player is worth 178k) and the capability of smaller FBS programs to fund an endeavor like this, when practically all teams already operate in the red.
Plus she's also completely ignoring the variables that allow NFL players to leverage for 46.5%.
Also the small problem of paying all players the same regardless of contribution.
-
Yeah good point. Using the mean really skews some of the numbers. The super revenue generating Johnny Footballs of the world will likely be making significant $$$ a year out of college anyways. I, for one, feel no sympathy for the group of people that are going to be making millions regardless.
The median FMV number would be much more interesting -- but that number is impossible to determine because it's impossible to determine an exact player's exact FMV.
Also, that report was made in 2012. It strikes me as odd that it is being widely reported on now, considering that this "should players be paid" issue isn't exactly unique to 2014.
-
If you think about it, athletics have no place in a collegiate environment. they should be banished. but for the players to think they should get paid tho i mean wtf. its college, you don't get paid to play sports.
-
How about $7.25 an hour?
-
no one cares about college football outside of the southeast united states and the midwest. and no one cares about either of those areas of the country.
Several billion cares, Kimmy.
-
The only ones who care are the ones who get rich
-
The only ones who care are the ones who get rich. Athletes not athletic directors.
-
The only ones who care are the ones who get rich. Athletes not athletic directors.
the NCAA knows they effed up by hoarding all the money. They could have avoided all this if they would have split up the major conferences from the smaller ones that don't make the bucks like the big schools. They'll do this now, but will it be in time before it all goes to pot.
-
The only ones who care are the ones who get rich. Athletes not athletic directors.
the NCAA knows they effed up by hoarding all the money. They could have avoided all this if they would have split up the major conferences from the smaller ones that don't make the bucks like the big schools. They'll do this now, but will it be in time before it all goes to pot.
If they pay the athletes this is exactly where the money will go.
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
-
April 24, 2014 | By Michelle Brutlag Hosick
DI Board of Directors endorses restructuring process, seeks feedback
New structure could be approved as early as August
Highlights
Board members Kirk Schulz, president of Kansas State University, and Michael Drake; chancellor of the University of California, Irvine; discuss Division I’s restructuring process.
WHAT HAPPENED: At its meeting Thursday, the Division I Board of Directors, composed of university presidents, endorsed a restructuring process that will be more agile to adapt to changes in the division, give student-athletes a greater voice in decision-making and provide more autonomy to the five major conferences.
WHAT’S NEXT: The board members are soliciting feedback from member schools this spring and plan to adopt a new Division I structure in August.
The Division I Board of Directors is one step closer to approving a new governance system in August.
The board endorsed the restructuring process, which is aimed at allowing the division to be more nimble, streamlined and responsive to needs – particularly the needs of student-athletes – during its meeting Thursday in Indianapolis. The Steering Committee on Governance, made up of university presidents, drafted the restructuring plan.
“The model we sent to the membership today is not a final product,” said Wake Forest President Nathan Hatch, chair of the board and the steering committee. “Some aspects of the model remain under discussion, and we hope the membership will provide us further input.”
Under the proposal, the division would still be led by a Board of Directors composed primarily of university presidents. However, new voices would be added: the chair of the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee; the chair of a new group tentatively called the Council; and the most senior Division I member of the Faculty Athletics Representatives Association’s executive committee. The council chair would always be an athletics director, giving that constituency an automatic spot on the board.
The Board would focus chiefly on oversight and strategic issues, while leaving much of the day-to-day policy and legislative responsibility to the council.
The council, composed of at least 60 percent athletics directors, would have 38 members: one from each conference plus two voting student-athletes and four commissioners (one from the five highest profile Football Bowl Subdivision conferences, one from the remaining FBS conferences, one from the Football Championship Subdivision conferences and one from the remaining conferences). The council would be the final voice on shared-governance rule-making decisions.
The steering committee suggests creating three bodies that would assist the council in its work and comprise the “working level” of Division I: an academics-focused group, a championships-focused group and a legislative group. Council members would determine implementation details, including what other groups are needed, how the groups will be populated and reporting lines. The steering committee also emphasized the need for a nomination process that is competency-based and diverse.
In order to allow the five highest-resource conferences (the Atlantic Coast Conference, Big 12 Conference, Big Ten Conference, Pac-12 Conference and Southeastern Conference) to address their unique challenges, the model would grant them autonomy to make rules on specific matters affecting the interests of student-athletes.
The university presidents who serve on the steering committee continue to seek more clarity and specificity about these proposed areas of autonomy. While retaining the concepts that were included in the “actionable” category, the board decided that the process it had identified as “actionable” - requiring the conferences other than the highest-profile five to take a separate vote – would not be included in the proposal.
The steering committee is seeking more feedback on the how the remaining 27 conferences would want to apply decisions made by the 65 schools in the five highest-profile conferences.
Areas in which the membership generally agrees on autonomy for the five conferences include:
•financial aid, including full cost of attendance and scholarship guarantees;
•insurance, including policies that protect future earnings;
•academic support, particularly for at-risk student-athletes; and
•other support, such as travel for families, free tickets to athletics events, and expenses associated with practice and competition (such as parking).
The steering committee continues to discuss other areas that could be included in the areas of autonomy, including the creation of mandatory time away from athletics for student-athletes; eliminating rules that prohibit student-athletes from pursuing careers outside of athletics while still competing (for example, making music and art or writing a book); recruiting; transfer issues; and athletics department personnel.
The board will seek feedback on some questions raised by members of governance bodies in recent days, including: the process by which items decided by the full division could become part of the list of autonomous areas; the voting, interpretation and enforcement processes within the five highest-profile conferences; and the core structure that separates not only the five highest-profile conferences into their own group but also continues a separation of the next five conferences (the American Athletic Conference, Conference-USA, Mid-American Conference, Mountain West Conference and Sun Belt Conference) from the remaining 22.
-
The steering committee will seek broad membership feedback over the summer. More information about how to submit feedback will be distributed to members in the coming days. Feedback will be released to the membership at the conclusion of the comment period, expected to be in late June.
The board will vote on final recommendations in August. As part of Thursday’s action, the board members resolved to begin the transition to the new governance structure by fall 2014, with a new council and board beginning their terms at the 2015 NCAA Convention. In order to make the transition as smooth as possible, current councils and cabinets will be maintained through January 2015.
In other business, the board adopted a change to waiver policy for transfer student-athletes, which was recommended last week by the Leadership Council. Qualifying student-athletes who cannot transfer and play immediately without a waiver will be allowed a sixth year to complete their four years of eligibility.
The change primarily impacts student-athletes who play baseball, basketball, bowl subdivision football and men’s ice hockey, as well as those in other sports who already transferred once. These student-athletes would no longer be able to seek a waiver to transfer and compete immediately.
Also, at the close of Thursday’s meeting, all new rules adopted by the Legislative Council, including a rule lifting restrictions on feeding student-athletes, became final.
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
-
Had a long conversation with a regular at the brewery about the long term repercussions on the body of a four year athlete and it was humbling. I support some sort of school related aid to surgeries/medical care related to injuries sustained during their time as an athlete.
-
If you think about it, athletics have no place in a collegiate environment. they should be banished. but for the players to think they should get paid tho i mean wtf. its college, you don't get paid to play sports.
Yeah. I mean, there should still be sports, but everything should be like club sports are now.
-
If you think about it, athletics have no place in a collegiate environment. they should be banished. but for the players to think they should get paid tho i mean wtf. its college, you don't get paid to play sports.
Yeah. I mean, there should still be sports, but everything should be like club sports are now.
Except we should play the more popular ones in big stadiums. And since they are representing the school, we should probably throw in some tuition assistance while we are at it. Sounds like the best plan to me. :thumbsup:
-
If you think about it, athletics have no place in a collegiate environment. they should be banished. but for the players to think they should get paid tho i mean wtf. its college, you don't get paid to play sports.
Yeah. I mean, there should still be sports, but everything should be like club sports are now.
Except we should play the more popular ones in big stadiums. And since they are representing the school, we should probably throw in some tuition assistance while we are at it. Sounds like the best plan to me. :thumbsup:
Throw the dog a bone, maybe it won't bite you. :fatty:
-
Pat White Suggests Alabama Offered Him a Corvette To Sign with Tide
Posted by Clay Travis
Steve Mitchell-USA TODAY Sports / Steve Mitchell-USA TODAY Sports
On Monday Alabama running back Derrick Henry posted a picture of his new car. "Everybody meet my new baby, Fiona."
Immediately everyone in the SEC accused Alabama of buying the car for him. Because, well, it's the SEC and this is what happens every time a top player who doesn't have a job posts photos of himself driving a nice car. Which happens, to be fair, a ton.
Y'all inundated me with this picture, but I wasn't going to write about it until former West Virginia quarterback Pat White stepped into the mix. Posting on his own Facebook page alongside photos of Henry's new ride, "Stop pretending like you didn't know the crimson tide has been doing this for years. Still glad I turned down a Corvette to become a mountaineer."
Oh. Snap. There's just one problem with White's Bama takedown. According to Rivals he didn't have an offer from Alabama. Of course, Rivals is not infallible when it comes to recruiting offers, so maybe White did have an offer from the Tide. If so, the current Edmonton Eskimos quarterback made an intriguing decision if he gave up a Corvette and the home state school to go to West Virginia for four years.
Has that decision ever been made before by anyone for any reason?
Regardless, the lesson, as always, for college football players: Don't post your new cars on Instagram. Sure, you may deserve those cars -- even if they violate NCAA rules -- given how much you're making the school, but even if the cars are entirely purchased with your own money no one is going to believe that. Not even former top football recruits from Alabama.
Pat White Suggests Alabama Offered Him a Corvette To Sign with Tide
http://instagram.com/p/n6skUDumkX/
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
Yea. You're right, my point is that this opens things up in ways that may be unforeseen by the players currently involved.
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
Yea. You're right, my point is that this opens things up in ways that may be unforeseen by the players currently involved.
Slippery slope. Lawyers will find a correlation in everything. When did people quit taking responsibility for their decisions? I don't feel bad for guys that use their natural and developed abilities to become famous and gain incredible networks while playing a sport and receiving a free education with strong academic support.
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
Yea. You're right, my point is that this opens things up in ways that may be unforeseen by the players currently involved.
Slippery slope. Lawyers will find a correlation in everything. When did people quit taking responsibility for their decisions? I don't feel bad for guys that use their natural and developed abilities to become famous and gain incredible networks while playing a sport and receiving a free education with strong academic support.
I don't think anyone is asking people to feel sorry for these athletes. We can all save our sorrow for malnutrition and child poverty, but this is about fairness. It's also unfair that most of us financed our education on student loans, but their is no collective action around that now so we're left with this movement of student athletes. I think it's part of a broader movement focused on fairness in education. We all were exploited, just to varying degrees.
More to your point though, lawyers do suck and these developments do open things up for potentially nefarious ends that could fundamentally change college athletics. Maybe nothing changes too much but the chances are now higher that it does. That the NCAA was not more proactive shows how they had their heads in the sand and were fine with the status quo, which was untenable.
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
Yea. You're right, my point is that this opens things up in ways that may be unforeseen by the players currently involved.
Slippery slope. Lawyers will find a correlation in everything. When did people quit taking responsibility for their decisions? I don't feel bad for guys that use their natural and developed abilities to become famous and gain incredible networks while playing a sport and receiving a free education with strong academic support.
I don't think anyone is asking people to feel sorry for these athletes. We can all save our sorrow for malnutrition and child poverty, but this is about fairness. It's also unfair that most of us financed our education on student loans, but their is no collective action around that now so we're left with this movement of student athletes. I think it's part of a broader movement focused on fairness in education. We all were exploited, just to varying degrees.
More to your point though, lawyers do suck and these developments do open things up for potentially nefarious ends that could fundamentally change college athletics. Maybe nothing changes too much but the chances are now higher that it does. That the NCAA was not more proactive shows how they had their heads in the sand and were fine with the status quo, which was untenable.
Well put, Cleveland.
Your post sparked a thought and a question: Perhaps "we" should go ahead and forgive student loan debt and offset that action with a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to the financial institutions that hold the debt. Are there any legitimate reprucussions to fear and would that not stimulate the economy in a way unrivaled by any alternative that has been discussed or applied?
-
I can't help but think that if the NCAA would've gotten in front of this long ago and paid, at least, cost of attendance, then this whole situation would never have happened (the NLRB, unionization stuff). Now, if we take Colter and friends at their word, this was all just leverage to get cost of attendance and voice at the table. Even if he is approaching this with the best of intentions, opening up the unionization can of worms really creates the possibility that this may change college athletics in some fundamental ways. Hopefully, not for the worse.
I'm not pro unionization of college athletes, but just so you know they aren't asking for money/ They want medical benefits, providing full cost of living has nothing to do with that.
Yea. You're right, my point is that this opens things up in ways that may be unforeseen by the players currently involved.
Slippery slope. Lawyers will find a correlation in everything. When did people quit taking responsibility for their decisions? I don't feel bad for guys that use their natural and developed abilities to become famous and gain incredible networks while playing a sport and receiving a free education with strong academic support.
I don't think anyone is asking people to feel sorry for these athletes. We can all save our sorrow for malnutrition and child poverty, but this is about fairness. It's also unfair that most of us financed our education on student loans, but their is no collective action around that now so we're left with this movement of student athletes. I think it's part of a broader movement focused on fairness in education. We all were exploited, just to varying degrees.
More to your point though, lawyers do suck and these developments do open things up for potentially nefarious ends that could fundamentally change college athletics. Maybe nothing changes too much but the chances are now higher that it does. That the NCAA was not more proactive shows how they had their heads in the sand and were fine with the status quo, which was untenable.
Well put, Cleveland.
Your post sparked a thought and a question: Perhaps "we" should go ahead and forgive student loan debt and offset that action with a dollar-for-dollar tax credit to the financial institutions that hold the debt. Are there any legitimate reprucussions to fear and would that not stimulate the economy in a way unrivaled by any alternative that has been discussed or applied?
1) Appreciate thr quotes around we, hard to define who that actually is.
2) Your proposal, which I'm reading as serious (never can tell on this board), sure as hell would stimulate the economy more than the community reinvestment act blah blah blah that came out of Congress during the recession.
Give it a few more decades of escalating college costs, increasing reliance on loans to attend, and we'll have a perfect storm for another recession or at least such a low level of demand that the macroeconomy will slug along at an anemic pace.
-
Well, the writing is on the wall.
Sweeping reform to the NCAA model has seemed inevitable. The university presidents in the Pac-12 may have just expedited its timeline.
According to a report by the Associated Press, those 12 presidents sent a joint letter to their counterparts in the other four power conferences—the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC—proposing they support a number of radical changes, chief among them a bid for autonomy from the NCAA.
Here are some of the changes the Pac-12 presidents asked for, per AP writer Antonio Gonzalez:
“
— Permit institutions to make scholarship awards up to the full cost of attendance.
— Provide reasonable ongoing medical or insurance assistance for student-athletes who suffer an incapacitating injury in competition or practice. Continue efforts to reduce the incidence of disabling injury.
— Guarantee scholarships for enough time to complete a bachelor's degree, provided that the student remains in good academic standing.
— Similarly decrease time demands out of season by reducing out-of-season competition and practices, and by considering shorter seasons in specific sports.
— Address the "one and done" phenomenon in men's basketball. If the NBA and its Players Association are unable to agree to raising the age limit for players, consider restoring the freshman ineligibility rule in men's basketball.
— Provide student-athletes a meaningful role in governance at the conference and NCAA levels.
— Adjust existing restrictions so that student-athletes preparing for the next stage of their careers are not unnecessarily deprived of the advice and counsel of agents and other competent professionals, but without professionalizing intercollegiate athletics.
— Liberalize the current rules limiting the ability of student-athletes to transfer between institutions.
”
"We acknowledge the core objectives could prove to be expensive and controversial, but the risks of inaction or moving too slowly are far greater," reads the presidents' letter, per the report. "The time for tinkering with the rules and making small adjustments is over."
The Pac-12 presidents might have a point.
Especially with the situation at Northwestern, where former quarterback Kain Colter has helped earn the players the right to unionize—if they so choose—by proving them employees of the university. The walls of the old NCAA model seem destined to break.
Jerry Hinnen of CBS Sports drew a smart comparison between the points listed above and the points of the College Athletes Players Association, the organization Colter helped found:
“
In addition to supporting the five major conferences' bid for autonomy within the NCAA's governance structure, the letter outlines 10 proposed changes to the current NCAA model, many of them similar to those supported by the College Athletes Player Association. The AP reports the letter was "spurred in part" by the move by former and current Northwestern football players to unionize under the CAPA banner.
”
Reports of this letter, which was delivered last week, came on the heels of another potentially meaningful development. According to Steve Berkowitz of USA Today, two United States Congressmen sent a letter to NCAA president Mark Emmert, asking him to answer more than two dozen questions about the practices of his organization.
To say this issue is coming to a head is putting it lightly.
If nothing is done soon—and "something," in this case, does not include unlimited pasta—the rabbles for reform could cast a pall over the upcoming college football season. In a year where the NCAA finally caved to public sentiment, abandoned the BCS and instituted the College Football Playoff, that would be both ironic and disappointing.
Then again, there are legitimate reasons to be wary of the Pac-12 presidents' proposal. Supporting the full cost of attendance for scholarships would give bigger, richer schools an unfair advantage (even more than they currently enjoy) in recruiting and likely lead to a breakdown of the current NCAA structure.
The power conferences might, in theory, have to become the new Division I, with the other five current FBS leagues, and all of their teams, being left behind. That is the road this letter goes down, and though unlikely to take effect in the immediate future, it remains to be seen how the other four conferences and the NCAA respond.
According to the report, the Pac-12 presidents requested a response from their colleagues by June 4 at the latest.
-
The small time schools don't want to be left out. :lol:
For as much criticism as the NCAA receives—and it deserves much of it—it's also easily forgotten that it's an entity that serves its members' interests.
The membership is made up of the schools, which are the ones that determine if legislation passes or not. Similarly, the membership can push back if the so-called Big Five/Power Five/etc., wants voting autonomy on several hot-button issues like cost of attendance, scholarship protection, liberalizing transfer rules and better health benefits.
The NCAA board of directors is expected to vote on restructuring the governance model in early August. The board previously endorsed the new model in April.
Earlier this week, Pac-12 presidents sent a letter, obtained by the AP, to their counterparts in the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12 and SEC calling for swift changes to the current governance model. In short, it was another unofficial vote of approval for autonomy among the five wealthiest conferences.
"We acknowledge the core objectives could prove to be expensive and controversial, but the risks of inaction or moving too slowly are far greater," the letter read. "The time for tinkering with the rules and making small adjustments is over."
Many of these points overlap with the demands made by Northwestern players, who voted last month on whether they would unionize as university employees. The results of the vote won't be known for some time.
The inability to agree on many of the aforementioned player-related issues, which isn't surprising given the sheer size and bureaucracy of the NCAA, is a big reason why Northwestern players initially wanted collective bargaining power.
However, there are still those opposed to the idea of autonomy within the NCAA. A day after the Pac-12 letter was obtained, Boise State president Bob Kustra penned his own letter to USA Today (via the Idaho Statesman) slamming the Power Five's attempts to split off within the NCAA:
“It's time for the NCAA to take a stand for fiscal responsibility and the rightful place of intercollegiate athletics in American higher education and put a stop to the arms race by rejecting all reforms related to enhancing an already premier and first-class experience for student-athletes.”
In fairness, Kustra agreed that three reforms do need to be made: improved medical monitoring related to concussions, the chance for athletes to finish their education on the university's dime at a later date and scholarship protection following a career-ending injury.
Those are almost universally considered to be important subjects.
Kustra's letter, which refers to autonomy as a "grab for money and power," is interesting nevertheless. Boise State was once set to join the now-defunct Big East in an attempt to be included among the power conferences. By the end of 2012, however, the Broncos officially opted to stay in the Mountain West. A report via ESPN in the following days revealed that the Mountain West's re-worked television contract played a role in Boise State's decision.
Of course, the term "hypocrisy" should be banned from the college athletics dictionary since it's no surprise that administrators do and say what best serves their present situations. Though Boise State and Alabama vote under the same governance umbrella, they are operated differently as determined by budget. Kustra admits as much in his letter.
(And Boise State isn't even the most extreme example with a $37 million budget, per Kustra.)
That means, beyond NCAA rules, there's little to no consistency across college athletics. Schools and conferences make decisions—from scheduling to legislation—that are, understandably, self-centered.
As Dan Wolken of USA Today points out, with so many varying opinions, it's no wonder why every proposal hangs in a constant balance.
Ultimately, autonomy among the Power Five seems inevitable. As Kustra says, "university presidents are so quick to fall in line with powerful conference commissioners who seem to be calling the shots with these NCAA reforms." There's no doubt the SEC's Mike Slive and the Big Ten's Jim Delany have substantial power and influence.
But folks like Kustra have their own goal: to appeal to members of the board who represent the lesser conferences and division. Folks like Kustra won't let autonomy happen without a fight.
-
Solid pasta reference
-
Solid pasta reference
Care to explain. :dunno:
-
College athletics sold its soul 20 years ago, which is why its athletes should go ahead and squeeze
Posted Tuesday, Aug. 19, 2014 3 comments Print Reprints
By Mac Engel
[email protected]
Shortly after he became the president of Baylor University, one of the first pieces of advice Ken Starr received was from a prominent member of the school’s board of regents.
Starr was told the key to building a great school was to “win football games.”
Only in America does this make perfect sense.
From Georgetown to Colgate to Michigan to Texas, ballgames are the best way to build an institution of higher learning.
Since Starr took over in June 2010, Baylor has won football games. The Bears are 36-16 the past four years.
Bet every dollar you have ever had and will have that Baylor’s donations and applications are at an all-time high in these past four years.
This week, Baylor opens its latest toy, the $250 million McLane Stadium, where fans can watch in great comfort big games against Northwestern State, Lamar and Incarnate Word, among others.
This is no knock on Baylor — OK, playing Incarnate Word is embarrassing — because this is a pandemic of priority-skewed spending on a generation that has shown no interest in a cure. And since there is no cure and we clearly do not care, all parties involved should be in on the squeeze.
College administrators at the schools that participate in this madness can no longer say it’s about education after they announce fundraising plans for sports facilities that are more costly than anything associated with higher learning.
College coaches and athletic directors can no longer defend a model that does not include increased compensation for the athlete-students while they attend a ribbon-cutting ceremony for another facility that is barely used.
This is the pinnacle of having it both ways.
To pay student-athletes is a Pandora’s Box that will eventually lead to the elimination of more non-revenue sports from Division I programs, but I can no longer rationalize the ancient amateur model when everything around it is professional.
It is 2014 and a new part of the Great American Way is to squeeze whomever before they do it — or as they are doing it — to you.
Of course the cost of a scholarship is worth $250K at some schools, but the American Way is to squeeze for more.
College athletes, whether it’s the starting quarterback at Texas or the women’s golfer at North Texas, are silly not to demand an increased cut, priorities and consequences be damned.
Since the mid-1990s college athletics has been about revenues, leaving universities exposed to this inevitable cash-grab by the athlete-students.
It won’t be too long before Texas A&M is done with its $450 million face-lift to Manziel Field. This is after SMU, North Texas, TCU, Houston, Texas, Texas Tech all poured in millions for new or improved football facilities.
Since 2000, the state of Texas has seen eight venues built or remodeled at a cost of more than $1 billion. You would think that at that cost they would be open 24/7/365. These eight venues are open roughly, maybe, 10 days a year each.
Only in America do we spend hundreds of millions of dollars on venues we barely use, and it makes perfect sense.
This price tag does not include the costs of other new facilities, salaries for coaches, raises for assistants and increased support staff. The University of Texas spent $13 million to change football staffs earlier this year, according to the Austin American-Statesman.
We talk about the importance of math and science, but priorities can be easily evaluated in how you spend your money. Math and science are important, but winning football games in a nice stadium is more important because it’s more fun.
Today’s big-time Division I athlete-student cannot worry if the athletic department will go broke or sweat whether their potential increased compensation will jeopardize the future of the softball team or any other non-revenue sport. This is America, and we no longer worry about the next 10 years but rather what will happen in the next 10 months. This is the YOLO generation.
Thirty years ago, it would have been preposterous to think a university was built on the back of a winning football team. Today it makes perfect sense.
Twenty years ago, it would have been preposterous to spend nearly $500 million on a face-lift for a college football stadium. Today it makes perfect sense.
This is how you build an institution of higher learning.
Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2014/08/18/6051708/college-athletics-sold-its-soul.html#storylink=cpy
-
Here's another opinion by a pro athlete:
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Speaks Out Against "NCAA Tyranny," Tells "College Athletes of the World" to "Unite"
Gus Turner
8 hrs ago
As a former college athlete himself, NBA Hall of Famer Kareem Abdul-Jabbar can speak from experience when he says that something is wrong with the NCAA. Today, the Laker legend did just that, tearing down the collegiate overseer in a well-reasoned piece published via Jacobin.
Detailing his own career as a UCLA Bruin, Abdul-Jabbar talks about how he "felt exploited and dissatisfied" by the student-athlete system, going on to discuss the numerous injustices and burdens weighed against college athletes. He places a particular focus on how easy it is for them to lose their academic scholarships due to injury, and the unfairness of scholarship athletes being unable to "make money on the side". Essentially, Abdul-Jabbar is framing the relationship between student-athletes and the NCAA as being outrageously one-sided.
To close, Abdul-Jabbar draws out a parallel between student-athletes and those once exploited in sweatshops by multi-billion dollar companies like Hanes, Walmart, JC Penny, and Puma:
The children sometimes were forced to work nineteen to twenty-hour shifts, slapped and beaten if they took too long in the bathroom, and paid pennies for their efforts. According to the report, “The workers say that if they could earn just thirty-six cents an hour, they could climb out of misery and into poverty, where they could live with a modicum of decency.”
Thirty-six cents an hour.
While such horrific and despicable conditions are rarer in the United States, we still have to be vigilant against all forms of exploitation so that by condoning one form, we don’t implicitly condone others. Which is why, in the name of fairness, we must bring an end to the indentured servitude of college athletes and start paying them what they are worth.
The August decision by a federal judge to issue an injunction against NCAA rules that ban athletes from earning money from the use of their names and likenesses in video games, also included television broadcasts. This in itself could do much to bring about the end of NCAA tyranny.
It's scathing, to say the least. And, undoubtedly, Abdul-Jabbar has a point. While athletic directors, head coaches, university presidents, and NCAA officials rake in salaries which can pay them millions of dollars, many athletes are forced to scrape together cash by less legitimate means. We can criticize Jameis Winston and Todd Gurley and Johnny Manziel all we want for (allegedly) selling their autographs, but we also need to take a hard look at the circumstances which forced them to that end. Abdul-Jabbar goes so far as to sympathize with an athlete who may have cheated for the sake of gaining a quick buck.
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Speaks Out Against "NCAA Tyranny," Tells "College Athletes of the World" to "Unite" ? © Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Speaks Out Against "NCAA Tyranny," Tells "College Athletes of the World" to "Uni... Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Speaks Out Against "NCAA Tyranny," Tells "College Athletes of the World" to "Unite"
"I never personally encountered any players who cheated or shaved points," he writes, "but I could see why some resorted to illegally working an extra job or accepting monetary gifts in order to get by."
As we all know, something needs to be done about the NCAA. When a former player is saying that he can understand why a player would compromise the integrity of the game for the sake of cash, then there's clearly a desperation present that we're not connecting with enough. At the end of the day, student-athletes, like the rest of us, gotta eat.
-
is anybody else not reading the last couple of super long articles or is that just me?
-
:martavious:
-
Folks, the NCAA is sucking balls. They are trying to figure out how to keep most of the money they make along with the NFL farm system.
-
Folks, the NCAA is sucking balls. They are trying to figure out how to keep most of the money they make along with the NFL farm system.
You bring up a good point the nfl and nba should really have to draft out of high school. Don't like your spot, go somewhere to develop... Overseas or semipro. If you want to go to ncaa, do that.
-
http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=209788901 (http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=209788901)
Summary: All Big 12 schools will give cost of attendance and guaranteed multiyear scholarships beginning next fall.
-
http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=209788901 (http://www.big12sports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=10410&ATCLID=209788901)
Summary: All Big 12 schools will give cost of attendance and guaranteed multiyear scholarships beginning next fall.
It will be more in the near future. Texas is willing to offer a ten thousand dollar stipend to scholarship athletes.
-
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12249290/richard-sherman-michael-bennett-seattle-seahawks-bash-ncaa
-
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12249290/richard-sherman-michael-bennett-seattle-seahawks-bash-ncaa
Good find and great read.
My feelings exactly. It's will happen; sooner or later.
-
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12249290/richard-sherman-michael-bennett-seattle-seahawks-bash-ncaa
Good find and great read.
My feelings exactly. It's will happen; sooner or later.
If it is that bad, they could always just not play football. It should be illegal for the NFL to discriminate based upon age. It's not the NCAA or any university's fault that the NFL is using them as a farm system.
-
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12249290/richard-sherman-michael-bennett-seattle-seahawks-bash-ncaa
Good find and great read.
My feelings exactly. It's will happen; sooner or later.
If it is that bad, they could always just not play football. It should be illegal for the NFL to discriminate based upon age. It's not the NCAA or any university's fault that the NFL is using them as a farm system.
The NFL is a private company, so if they want a minimum age requirement for its employees that is their decision to make. And it's not an age requirement as much as it is an education/maturity requirement (3 years after HS graduation). Amobi Okoye was drafted a few years ago when he was 19.
And Michael Bennett made some of the dumbest arguments for paying student athletes that I've ever read/heard. The restaurant/free burger analogy is just plain asinine. Also, his estimate on how much TAMU makes in licensing or jersey sales is only off by about $57M... Based on all of his comments I really don't think he knows how the system works.
Sherman makes a few good points, but I'm assuming he was surrounded by several students at Stanford who did not work their way through college. Not everyone goes home for the day when they are finished with class.
This entire article was laughable.
-
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12249290/richard-sherman-michael-bennett-seattle-seahawks-bash-ncaa
Good find and great read.
My feelings exactly. It's will happen; sooner or later.
If it is that bad, they could always just not play football. It should be illegal for the NFL to discriminate based upon age. It's not the NCAA or any university's fault that the NFL is using them as a farm system.
The NFL is a private company, so if they want a minimum age requirement for its employees that is their decision to make. And it's not an age requirement as much as it is an education/maturity requirement (3 years after HS graduation). Amobi Okoye was drafted a few years ago when he was 19.
And Michael Bennett made some of the dumbest arguments for paying student athletes that I've ever read/heard. The restaurant/free burger analogy is just plain asinine. Also, his estimate on how much TAMU makes in licensing or jersey sales is only off by about $57M... Based on all of his comments I really don't think he knows how the system works.
Sherman makes a few good points, but I'm assuming he was surrounded by several students at Stanford who did not work their way through college. Not everyone goes home for the day when they are finished with class.
This entire article was laughable.
exactly. This article was terrible, but i still understand and see both sides. There's a really good documentary on Netflix called, "Schooled: The Price of College Sports." It's really good and discusses this exact subject.
-
John Oliver is good at these
http://deadspin.com/let-john-oliver-remind-you-that-march-madness-and-the-n-1691659310?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
-
John Oliver is good at these
http://deadspin.com/let-john-oliver-remind-you-that-march-madness-and-the-n-1691659310?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
God, I love those comments!!! Seems like they get it; as do most honest people.
-
The debate is valid, but Shabazz Napier claiming hunger is ridiculous.
-
The debate is valid, but Shabazz Napier claiming hunger is ridiculous.
Forth meal thou. :D
-
The debate is valid, but Shabazz Napier claiming hunger is ridiculous.
The reality is, when I played division 1 college football (finished 5 years ago), we got $660 a month to cover rent, bills, food, gas, cell phone, and any other spending money. You're not getting additional financial aid, so that's what you live on for the month. Now, M-F you do get training table dinner (at least where I went), so at least that meal is paid for. (They've changed the rules regarding food recently, and honestly, probably a lot had to do with what Napier said.)
So, take that $660 and subtract ~$400 for rent, ~$125 for utilities (probably a little low), cell phone ~$100. See you later scholarship money. You still need gas for your car, insurance for your car, and oh yeah, you need to eat. And if you want to go out, like many college students do, that costs money as well.
If you disagree with my numbers, that's fine, you could say he has Boost and it's only $50 a month for cell phone rather than $100. And his rent is only $350. Great, you have $135 extra to get groceries now. For the month.
-
The debate is valid, but Shabazz Napier claiming hunger is ridiculous.
The reality is, when I played division 1 college football (finished 5 years ago), we got $660 a month to cover rent, bills, food, gas, cell phone, and any other spending money. You're not getting additional financial aid, so that's what you live on for the month. Now, M-F you do get training table dinner (at least where I went), so at least that meal is paid for. (They've changed the rules regarding food recently, and honestly, probably a lot had to do with what Napier said.)
So, take that $660 and subtract ~$400 for rent, ~$125 for utilities (probably a little low), cell phone ~$100. See you later scholarship money. You still need gas for your car, insurance for your car, and oh yeah, you need to eat. And if you want to go out, like many college students do, that costs money as well.
If you disagree with my numbers, that's fine, you could say he has Boost and it's only $50 a month for cell phone rather than $100. And his rent is only $350. Great, you have $135 extra to get groceries now. For the month.
so you only got 5 free meals a week? was this college D1 or D1ish?
-
The debate is valid, but Shabazz Napier claiming hunger is ridiculous.
The reality is, when I played division 1 college football (finished 5 years ago), we got $660 a month to cover rent, bills, food, gas, cell phone, and any other spending money. You're not getting additional financial aid, so that's what you live on for the month. Now, M-F you do get training table dinner (at least where I went), so at least that meal is paid for. (They've changed the rules regarding food recently, and honestly, probably a lot had to do with what Napier said.)
So, take that $660 and subtract ~$400 for rent, ~$125 for utilities (probably a little low), cell phone ~$100. See you later scholarship money. You still need gas for your car, insurance for your car, and oh yeah, you need to eat. And if you want to go out, like many college students do, that costs money as well.
If you disagree with my numbers, that's fine, you could say he has Boost and it's only $50 a month for cell phone rather than $100. And his rent is only $350. Great, you have $135 extra to get groceries now. For the month.
Why weren't you able to get additional financial aid? S-As have been able to apply for Pell Grants for several years.
-
so you only got 5 free meals a week? was this college D1 or D1ish?
[/quote]
D1 P5 school. You could get 3 meals a day, but you had to live in the dorms.
-
was this school K-State and is your name James McGill?
-
so did you go hungry or just get creative?
-
If you stay in the dorms do you still get $660 on top of them paying for housing?
-
If you stay in the dorms do you still get $660 on top of them paying for housing?
No, that was for off-campus students-athletes. I believe if you lived on campus you didn't get any stipend, or it was very small.
-
so did you go hungry or just get creative?
Are you suggesting cannibalism? :sdeek:
-
so did you go hungry or just get creative?
Are you suggesting cannibalism? :sdeek:
That's very funny, meow meow. But we all know what CF3 meant... mice and rats caught with glue traps. :fatty:
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize)
There will be more to this story later, but pretty much the NLRB unanimously decided that student athletes aren't university employees and that they cannot unionize. Very telling that the decision was unanimous.
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize)
There will be more to this story later, but pretty much the NLRB unanimously decided that student athletes aren't university employees and that they cannot unionize. Very telling that the decision was unanimous.
Of course, they were going to get this thing dropped; there are millions of BIG BUCKS involved here. #multimilliondollarNCAA
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize)
There will be more to this story later, but pretty much the NLRB unanimously decided that student athletes aren't university employees and that they cannot unionize. Very telling that the decision was unanimous.
I mean I didn't understand the lawsuit, I'm not sure how you can claim being an employee without drawing a salary. I also don't understand how these smart Northwestern student athletes didn't understand the negative implications if the NLRB ruled in their favor.
-
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize (http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/13455477/nlrb-says-northwestern-players-cannot-unionize)
There will be more to this story later, but pretty much the NLRB unanimously decided that student athletes aren't university employees and that they cannot unionize. Very telling that the decision was unanimous.
I mean I didn't understand the lawsuit, I'm not sure how you can claim being an employee without drawing a salary. I also don't understand how these smart Northwestern student athletes didn't understand the negative implications if the NLRB ruled in their favor.
I suppose a lot of the maneuvering by the Northwestern contingent was to get leverage on other things (i.e. raising stipends, etc.).
-
Yes but only if they bring back EA's NCAA football
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
-
https://twitter.com/darrenrovell/status/1042099673081806848
:lol:
-
https://twitter.com/darrenrovell/status/1042099673081806848
:lol:
Yea, that's a ridiculous statement. To an extent, a big chunk of these players are already receiving payment in the form of an education, the question is clearly do they deserve more than that?
Eliminate athletic scholarships, then you'll be in line with your educational mission.
Let any player test the professional waters and return to college with no strings attached, so long as they don't sign any pro contract, then you'll be in line with your educational mission.
Anyone know if Wisconsin athletic department is self funded? Or if students fees subsidize part of it?
-
Well, it should be said that the NCAA is on the skids. Viewership is down and the players will inevitably go somewhere else to chase the money at that age. If the NCAA wants to maintain that the kids are student-athletes and that college sports is all just for amateurs, then that's what they're gonna get.
Here's an interesting article that sets up the Pac Pro Football program, a new league designed to "train" up kids who are NFL ineligible due to age and will get paid to play: https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2017/01/11/pacific-pro-football-league-developmental-college-ed-mccaffrey/96416744/
If you want to know more about it, they have their own website now: http://www.pacificprofootball.com/
-
I don't see how viewership is going to increase if the NCAA stops maintaining that college sports is just for amateurs.
-
Seems legit
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180920/abb0f50cb3b5ae04a2f0b0e43deaa281.png)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Food for thought folks.
https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/30957361/bill-introduced-sen-jerry-moran-allow-athlete-endorsement-deals