• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

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

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
jwinslow;1929907; said:
Which is why I fall firmly into separate camps in a question about 'should' and 'could'.

Schools can't afford it, athletics would be ruined/destroyed, booster violations would go through the roof. They should be but can't be paid.
Click to expand...

Good point. My opinion is some of these rules need changed though. Players are merely puppets to the NCAA. Why can't someone buy a player a pizza if they truly want to buy a player a pizza? If it were anyone else at that university, it's fine. But since their student athletes, it's a big no no. I just don't understand that rule at all. Accepting benefits ($$$) and accepting a meal just aren't on the same level, IMO.
 
Upvote 0
TooTallMenardo;1929914; said:
Good point. My opinion is some of these rules need changed though. Players are merely puppets to the NCAA. Why can't someone buy a player a pizza if they truly want to buy a player a pizza? If it were anyone else at that university, it's fine. But since their student athletes, it's a big no no. I just don't understand that rule at all. Accepting benefits ($$$) and accepting a meal just aren't on the same level, IMO.
Click to expand...

I think it's easier to make it a yes/no issue than it is to quantify the difference between "right" and "wrong". You make it legal to buy the kid a pizza - let's say that's $10. What about two pizzas? If one is legal, why can't two be legal? And if two is legal, why not three? Three becomes legal, why not a $40 watch? That's only $10 more than the three pizzas. I think it's pretty clear where I'm going. The cut-off is much easier to see when it is an all-or-nothing issue rather than trying to justify making $X legal but not a penny more.
 
Upvote 0
Zurp;1932126; said:
I think it's easier to make it a yes/no issue than it is to quantify the difference between "right" and "wrong". You make it legal to buy the kid a pizza - let's say that's $10. What about two pizzas? If one is legal, why can't two be legal? And if two is legal, why not three? Three becomes legal, why not a $40 watch? That's only $10 more than the three pizzas. I think it's pretty clear where I'm going. The cut-off is much easier to see when it is an all-or-nothing issue rather than trying to justify making $X legal but not a penny more.
Click to expand...

Just don't see buying someone food as being such a violation.
 
Upvote 0
The Ol' Ball Coach proposes that players get paid by the coaches. About half of the SEC coaches signed onto the proposal, but I can't see it ever being allowed by the NCAA.

CBS

Spurrier wants players to receive $300 a game

DESTIN, Fla. ? South Carolina coach Steve Spurrier said he was battling laryngitis so he had to speak softly. His message, though, was loud and clear: football players should receive financial compensation.

At Wednesday?s SEC spring meetings, Spurrier presented a proposal that league coaches ? out of their own pockets ? provide $300 a game to its players. The money would be for game expenses.


?They can give to their parents for travel, lodging, meals,? Spurrier said. ?Maybe they could take their girlfriends out Saturday night and so forth.?


Spurrier said six other coaches signed his proposal: Alabama?s Nick Saban, Florida?s Will Muschamp, Ole Miss? Houston Nutt, Mississippi State?s Dan Mullen, LSU?s Les Miles and Tennessee?s Derek Dooley.


?A bunch of us coaches felt so strongly about it we would be willing to pay 70 guys 300 bucks a game,? Spurrier said. ?That?s only $21,000 a game. I doubt it will get passed, but as the coaches in the SEC we make all the money as do the universities with television [deals]. And we need to give more to our players. That was something we need to get out there.?


The five coaches who didn?t sign Spurrier?s proposal: Arkansas? Bobby Petrino, Auburn?s Gene Chizik, Georgia?s Mark Richt, Kentucky?s Joker Phillips and Vanderbilt?s James Franklin.


"I told the other coaches Im going to tell the media what coaches wouldn't sign," Spurrier said.


SEC commissioner Mike Slive said it was doubtful Spurrier?s proposal could ever get passed.


"I don't think [it would pass],? Slive said. ?It was a gesture by Steve, thinking about student athlete welfare.?


Spurrier said he?s felt this way for years, especially how much money is made in college athletics by the universities and coaches.


Cont'd ...
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
:lol: I'm sure it's just a coincidence that these coaches all come out in favor of players getting paid now.

They know they could have the fucking pulitzer winner on campus next week, and it wouldn't be pretty.

Fuck the NCAA.
 
Upvote 0
BB73;1932570; said:
The Ol' Ball Coach proposes that players get paid by the coaches. About half of the SEC coaches signed onto the proposal, but I can't see it ever being allowed by the NCAA.

CBS
Click to expand...

just a guess at who voted to approve it:

Bama
Auburn (would significantly lower their payroll)
LSU
So. Carolina
Florida
2 others than ain't real relevant
 
Upvote 0
Nutriaitch;1933463; said:
just a guess at who voted to approve it:

Bama
Auburn (would significantly lower their payroll)
LSU
So. Carolina
Florida
2 others than ain't real relevant
Click to expand...

Votes for were:
Bama
LSU
USCe
Florida
Ole Miss
Miss St
Tenn

Auburn voted against it - Why would they want other schools to be able to pay players within the rules? :wink2:

Spurrier said six other coaches signed his proposal: Alabama?s Nick Saban, Florida?s Will Muschamp, Ole Miss? Houston Nutt, Mississippi State?s Dan Mullen, LSU?s Les Miles and Tennessee?s Derek Dooley.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
Jim Delaney and Steve Spurrier are at least discussing an issue that needs to be addressed. The student athletes on scholarship should be paid a stipend to help with the basic living expenses (i.e. clothes, barber, laundry, pizza, car payment, gas, girl friend expenses :biggrin:, etc.). Let's face it; with the games, practices, workouts, team meetings, classes, studying and some social life today's student athlete does not really have time for a job too.

The NCAA needs to address this issue. Currently not all NCAA college/university athletes get the same benefits; division 1 & 2 gets scholarships and division 3 doesn't.

Solution: (At least for football) just change the rules for division 1 FBS gets the stipend; and division 1 FCS doesn't get the stipend. To establish a level playing field for recruiting, any current school/conference that doesn't want to pay the stipend can opt out of the division 1 FBS and go into division 1 FCS. Basically you could do the same thing for the other sports (i.e. create a new division for those schools paying the stipend). What's the problem with one more division champion in each sport?

 
Upvote 0
Roundabout;1933517; said:
Its got to be all sports or no sports.... till then payments just won't have a chance in a court of law.
Click to expand...

aside from this part, it'll never pass, because it would have to the entire NCAA not just individual conferences.

$300 a game amounts to over $300k per year ($300 x 85 x 12games + CCG and Bowl games) coming out of the coaches' pockets.

that would be more than half the salary for a LOT of D1 coaches.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top