Should semipro/college players be paid, or allowed to sell their stuff? (NIL and Revenue Sharing)

[BigWoof31]

It's all happening!

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6564134

Big Ten commissioner Jim Delany said league athletic directors and officials have seriously discussed whether they should use some of their growing TV revenue to pay athletes more.



"Forty years ago, you had a scholarship plus $15 a month laundry money," Delany said. "Today, you have the same scholarship, but not with the $15 laundry money.



"How do we get back more toward the collegiate model and a regulatory system that is based more on student-athlete welfare than it is on a level playing field, where everything is about a cost issue and whether or not everybody can afford to do everything everybody else can do?" Delany asked

 

[BigWoof31]

is it possible for just one conference to do this? Seems like it would have to be a NCAA nationwide thing.....BUT, think about what a shift in recruiting would be like if only the big 10 were able to do this. I would think something like that would be HUGE selling point to a recruit

That's why it's happening. It isn't a cost of living issue.
It's to provide a recruiting boost under the shroud of "helping those unable to help themselves."

 

[alexhortdog95]

Maybe TP isn't the best choice for your example.

Regardless the real solution is to end the anti-competitive gentleman's agreement with the NFL and let 18 y/o's be drafted. THAT is the real sacred cow that everyone wants to preserve by focusing on inane trivialities such as kids getting compensated to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in the form of a free education & associated perks deserving "more".

How about the reverse? How about making the NFL a place where a four year college degree is REQUIRED? Could that do it too? I mean, if an agent knows a kid is untouchable for four to five years, and the kid knows they need the degree to get into the NFL - and a violation of NCAA rules could get you kicked out - would they risk it? Then, maybe that booster would keep his hand in his pocket, or the folks at the McDonalds near/on campus wouldn't be giving free fries...

I feel some McNugget love coming on...

 

[alexhortdog95]

Sweet cream on an Ice Cream SAMMICH! LOL! Hey Gator - there's people in Florida STEALING CHICKEN NUGGETS?!?

http://www.wtsp.com/news/watercoole...en-Nugget-Hankering-Lands-Broward-Men-In-Jail

KEY WEST (CBSMiami) - So you break into a school full of office equipment, computers, microscopes, and other goodies. What do you grab? For two Broward men caught dead to rights in a Key West high school, they were after...the chicken nuggets?

30 pounds of high-school-cafeteria frozen chicken nuggets, sans sauce, were among the items allegedly stacked up by Lawrence Dixon of Davie, and Carl Dudley Crabtree of Hollywood, ready to be hauled to their waiting car.

Hmm...I wonder how FLORIDA voted in the AAU Vote....LOL...

Again, the Chicken Nugget reigns supreme!

 

[alexhortdog95]

Thanks for the research! I'll see what comes of my own personal google search.

Well, I got my first email back from Dr. Tom Osborne. Here's the email conversation (ignore the sappy stuff):

Dear Dr. Osborne,

First let me say it's an honor to write to you. I must say you and your staff are doing an excellent job (as you have always done), and you make me proud to be a fellow Nebraskan.

My questions today are in regards to the eligibility of players, the practice of 'grey-shirting' and the status of walk-on players. I contacted the NCAA and left a voice mail message for Rachel Newman-Baker, the director of NCAA Agent, Gambling, and Amateurism Activities, but I have yet to receive a phone call.

The questions I have stem around the topic of compensating the large revenue sport athletes at schools (in UNL's case, football). I do know that you are a staunch advocate of the pay-to-play/stipend scenario that many have put forth as a solution to the growing problem of illegal activities on the behalf of boosters to schools. I support your position on the matter, however, I?d like to get a bit of clarification on a scenario that someone posed to me.

The NCAA is cracking down on the activities that would give 'unfair treatment' to athletes. This is evident with the recent activities at The Ohio State University (OSU), The University of Southern California (USC), The University of North Carolina (UNC), and Auburn University. In an article that was posted by the Washington Times on March 16th of this year, Ms. Baker stated that, "The problem is the kids are coming into the colleges with the relationships already, particularly in the sport of Basketball." That is also evident with the fact that in the OSU case, a popular businessman was contacted instead of the school's athletic department in the matter. Now I'm not asking for a comment or clarification on any other school, but my question is at UNL's enforcement level, and how the school handles these situations:

A. The NCAA eligibility rules for student-athletes are vetted by the NCAA Clearinghouse. But what about an athlete that is 'grey-shirted' (which is not an official NCAA term)? Let's say that a grey-shirted athlete was allowed on the team, and while a member of the team, he or she took improper benefits from someone? Does being a member of the team as a non-scholarship athlete give you a different definition as a scholarship athlete that is on the team? Could the team be punished for this behavior by the NCAA even though the player was not on scholarship?

B. Do grey-shirted athletes receive an automatic scholarship when one becomes available, or are they basically treated as walk-ons?

C. For a walk-on player that is never offered a scholarship - are they also under the same rule of the NCAA when it comes to amateurism that was asked in question A?

Finally, if I am addressing these questions to the wrong person, can you forward my email or put me in contact with someone who may be able to answer my question?

Thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you!

Go Big Red!

And the response:

Alex,

In answer to your questions:

A. The term 'grey shirt' usually refers to a student-athlete who enrolls in school at mid‑year and then has his scholarship counted against the next year?s scholarship limits. If the student athlete is not enrolled in school in the fall semester, I don't believe that the student-athlete is considered a member of the team and I don't believe that activities involving a student‑athlete could be used to punish the team unless the school violated NCAA rules in its recruitment of the athlete.

B. Generally the term 'grey shirt' implies that a student-athlete sits out one semester and then enrolls at mid‑year on scholarship.

C. A walk-on player is governed by all NCAA rules once the walk-on player joins the team.

Thank you for writing.

Best wishes,
Tom Osborne


Tom Osborne
Athletic Director
University of Nebraska
One Memorial Stadium
PO Box 880120
Lincoln NE 68588-0120
402-4**-3011 phone
402-4**-9675 fax

I redacted his phone numbers.

 

[BB73]

The CFN guys weigh in on the issue.

Among the themes:

"It will never happen because of Title IX."

"It's just a PR move by Delany and the BIG."

"The NCAA are hypocrites."

"Only the BCS Conferences could afford it, so this is another sign of the coming Super-Conferences."

 

[BB73]

Ozone

The number being thrown around right now is $3,000 per athlete to cover assorted living expenses. To cover all of Ohio State's 400+ athletes would cost the university around $1.2 million.

But since they have it to spend, why can't they spend it?

It's being called by many a "game-changer", and is being used to show just how wide the gap is between the haves and have nots.

Such a plan will be decried as unfair to those institutions (essentially non-BCS schools) who cannot afford to keep up. Which begs the question, 'Are schools here to benefit the students, or are students here to benefit the schools?'

Clearly, the schools that can afford the increase want their students to benefit. The schools that cannot afford the increase, however, would appear to be opposed to not only their own students benefiting, but everybody else's as well.

The NCAA's intent is to make things fair for everybody, but it's also been put in place to benefit and protect the student-athletes. Killing a modest proposal such as the Big Ten is considering ($250/month per player) wouldn't seem to be protecting students at all. Rather it would be protecting those universities which couldn't afford to do the same. From the article linked above:


"With the Big Ten?s wealth, gained mostly from television contracts, Smith said most of its schools could add a cost-of-attendance increase to the aid already given. Leagues with similar revenues could provide the same benefits. Those without would be stressed to find such funds."


"Smith said those situations shouldn?t prevent the Big Ten from adding to the scholarships if it chooses."


"The reality is, if there?s cost of attendance and you can?t afford it, don?t do it,? he told reporters at the meetings. ?The teams you?re trying to beat can?t do it either. Don?t do it because Ohio State?s doing it. That?s one of the things schools at that level get trapped into thinking.?


Cont'd ...

 

[BUCKYLE]

Ozone

Fuckin' A.

Suck it Boise, and all other schools that think they "deserve" some slice of the pie that was neither promised or intended for them. Fuck you. Fuck your fans, and good-fucking-bye.

 

[BB73]

Fuckin' A.

Suck it Boise, and all other schools that think they "deserve" some slice of the pie that was neither promised or intended for them. Fuck you. Fuck your fans, and good-fucking-bye.

[bkb] And they didn't make an investment during the first 100 years of college football in order to create the demand for the pie. [/bkb]

 

[Gatorubet]

Sweet cream on an Ice Cream SAMMICH! LOL! Hey Gator - there's people in Florida STEALING CHICKEN NUGGETS?!?

http://www.wtsp.com/news/watercoole...en-Nugget-Hankering-Lands-Broward-Men-In-Jail

Broward County. Gonna have to ask Shark or some other Cane.

Hmm...I wonder how FLORIDA voted in the AAU Vote....LOL...

Indeed you should wonder....you're not in the AAU now and can't attend the meetings. :p

 

[Jake]

Paying players would reduce the scholarship funds available to support non-revenue athletes such as lacrosse, track and field, volleyball (Go Bucks!) and field hockey. So that is a counterproductive approach.

Agreed. Title IX would also come into play if compensating football players forced a school to drop women's wheelchair bowling, heaven forbid.

I still firmly believe that the most appropriate mechanism is to allow student-athletes to sell their autographs, memorabilia, bowl swag, whatever. This approach will allow the most marketable athletes (e.g., Pryor and Cam Newton) to realize their market value when it is at its peak. No detriment would result to the synchronized swimmers; they just wouldn't be able to make much money off their stuff.

Unfortunately, this would also open the door for "boosters" paying way over market value for such an autograph. The $100 handshake would quickly evolve into the $180,000 handshake. It would be a free for all, an open door for just about everything under the guise of selling memorabilia.

 

[Gatorubet]

Agreed. Title IX would also come into play if compensating football players forced a school to drop women's wheelchair bowling, heaven forbid.

Need some band aids for those knuckle abrasions Jake?

 

[Jake]

So far the only arguments I've seen here against allowing student-athletes to sell their swag relate to the claim that "only 10-16 schools will end up being competitive."

Then you need to read the thread, again.

Irony, indeed.

 

[Jake]

Need some band aids for those knuckle abrasions Jake?

Be careful, Gator. Your heart is bleeding, again. :p

 

[Systems_id]

Why couldn't you just allow athletes to take endorsement deals so long as they're not explicitly representing the university? That honestly seems like it'd clear a lot of this up.