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

[zincfinger]

The only difference between college football and the NFL is that the players aren't getting overtly paid.

That, and the players aren't nearly as good. So if you start overtly paying college players, you'll have the NFL, but with inferior players. You'll have the UFL. That sounds like an excellent business decision.

 

[Systems_id]

That, and the players aren't nearly as good. So if you start overtly paying college players, you'll have the NFL, but with inferior players. You'll have the UFL. That sounds like an excellent business decision.

Except that college football is already proven to make big money? Let's not forget one of the huge reasons this whole debate is happening.

 

[zincfinger]

Except that college football is already proven to make big money? Let's not forget one of the huge reasons this whole debate is happening.

Compared to the UFL, yes. Compared to the NFL, no. But I'm not sure what you're arguing here. That college football makes big money by many standards, and therefore the players should make big money, regardless of any considerations of how that may affect fan interest, marketability and profitability in the future? Or that college football makes big money by many standards now, and on that basis one can be confident that changes to it's (relatively) amateur nature would have no impact on fan interest, marketability, and profitability in the future?

 

[Bleed S & G]

Then please enlighten me, and I'm not being facetious. How would the landscape change so drastically from how it is now if players were allowed to take money, get endorsements, etc.?

The biggest change in the landscape would be Notre Dame becoming relevant again..

Plus this would likely never happen :(:

I simply won't stand for either :tongue2:

 

[Bleed S & G]

Duh. Alcohol and weed.

GPA!

 

[Bleed S & G]

Richest alumni bases:

Harvard
Stanford
Pitt
Columbia
Yale
MIT
Northwestern
U of Chicago (old B1G member)
Cornell
Cal
USC
Texas

Just in the B1G:

Iowa - Matthew Bucksbaum ? 1.2 billion net worth
Illini - Neil Bluhm ? 1.8 b
Minny - Austen Cargill II ? 2.4 b
Indiana ? Mark Cuban ? 2.5 b
Purude - Stephen Bechtel Jr. ? 2.9 b
Penn State - Terrence Pegula ? 3 b
tOSU - Yang Huiyan ? 4.1 b
NW - Lester Crown ? 4.9 b
Wisky - John Menard ? 5.2 b
MSU - Eli Broad ? 5.9 b
scUM - Larry Page ? 19.8 b
Nebraska - Warren Buffett ? 50 b

Not sure I wanna go there? we have a recruiting advantage due to history, tradition, fan base, academics, etc. If it?s about buying players? [censored] it, what?s the point with College Football?

Plus, the NCAA is no longer tax-exempt ? so it?ll never happen

 

[MaxBuck]

This debate is about just two things:

1. Where do you stand relative to the NCAA's overweening insistence upon player amateurism, and relative to that insistence being completely inconsistent among sports (e.g., eligibility rules relative to pro draft different for football, basketball, hockey, baseball, etc.)?

2. Given the NCAA insistence that athletes not benefit financially from their sports activities, where do you stand relative to multi-million dollar salaries for coaches and athletic directors?

If you think amateur status is paramount and have no problem with the magnificent hypocrisy represented by coaches' huge salaries, you prefer the status quo. Personally I can't understand this viewpoint, but most fans apparently have it.

 

[zincfinger]

This debate is about just two things:

1. Where do you stand relative to the NCAA's overweening insistence upon player amateurism, and relative to that insistence being completely inconsistent among sports (e.g., eligibility rules relative to pro draft different for football, basketball, hockey, baseball, etc.)?

2. Given the NCAA insistence that athletes not benefit financially from their sports activities, where do you stand relative to multi-million dollar salaries for coaches and athletic directors?

If you think amateur status is paramount and have no problem with the magnificent hypocrisy represented by coaches' huge salaries, you prefer the status quo. Personally I can't understand this viewpoint, but most fans apparently have it.

1. I'm for it, as for me personally, it's a central part of what makes college football entertaining. As far as eligibility rules relative to pro drafts being different for different sports, that's up to the individual professional leagues, as it should be, and has nothing to do with the NCAA.
2. I have no problem with it. Or rather, it's not that I have no problem with the "magnificent hypocrisy", it's that I don't see anything particularly hypocritical about it. Nobody ever suggested that college coaches would or should be amateurs and, from my perspective, amateur athletics are defined by the athletes competing without pay, not by everybody associated with the sport working without pay.

 

[MaxBuck]

As far as eligibility rules relative to pro drafts being different for different sports, that's up to the individual professional leagues, as it should be, and has nothing to do with the NCAA.

That is patently not true. The NBA has nothing whatever to do with NCAA rules that disqualify, permanently, any player who "announces for the draft." Same with the NFL and the parallel rule regarding that draft. Hockey players, though, are not ineligible to play in NCAA colleges after they are drafted. These rules relate to the NCAA, not to the pro leagues. Just bull[Mark May].

If NCAA had player welfare as its goal, announcing for a draft would have no bearing on a player's eligibility. A player should retain full eligibility until a contract were signed and the first paycheck received. Such a rule would benefit the player and still not affect amateur status. But player welfare has no part in the NCAA's decisionmaking. That's why those who like the status quo will remain happy with college sports - because nobody other the players and a precious few others see this corrupt system for what it is.

 

[zincfinger]

That is patently not true. The NBA has nothing whatever to do with NCAA rules that disqualify, permanently, any player who "announces for the draft." Same with the NFL and the parallel rule regarding that draft. Hockey players, though, are not ineligible to play in NCAA colleges after they are drafted. These rules relate to the NCAA, not to the pro leagues. Just bull[Mark May].

If NCAA had player welfare as its goal, announcing for a draft would have no bearing on a player's eligibility. A player should retain full eligibility until a contract were signed and the first paycheck received. Such a rule would benefit the player and still not affect amateur status. But player welfare has no part in the NCAA's decisionmaking. That's why those who like the status quo will remain happy with college sports - because nobody other the players and a precious few others see this corrupt system for what it is.

I misunderstood you; I thought you were talking about the pro leagues' different requirements on how long a player must be out of high school before he can be draft eligible. As far as NCAA hockey having a different rule relative to NCAA football and basketball as to what degree of contact with a pro league extinguishes a college player's eligibility, it maybe would make more sense if the sports were all identical on this question, but that doesn't really strike me as strong evidence of some blatant corruption that only a select few are willing or able to discern. In general, my point was never that NCAA rules are all perfect across the board. I'm sure they're not, by anyone's definition. My points in response to you were that i) I personally see substantial value in the amateurism of college sports, and ii) I don't see it as necessary that that amateurism extend to coaches in order to achieve some sort of definitional or moral consistency.

 

[matcar]

Really interesting read.


http://byliner.com/originals/the-cartel

 

[matcar]

And this.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...hame-of-college-sports/8643/?single_page=true

 

[matcar]

Quote from the above article.

?I?m not hiding,? Sonny Vaccaro told a closed hearing at the Willard Hotel in Washington, D.C., in 2001. ?We want to put our materials on the bodies of your athletes, and the best way to do that is buy your school. Or buy your coach.?
Vaccaro?s audience, the members of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, bristled. These were eminent reformers?among them the president of the National Collegiate Athletic Association, two former heads of the U.S. Olympic Committee, and several university presidents and chancellors. The Knight Foundation, a nonprofit that takes an interest in college athletics as part of its concern with civic life, had tasked them with saving college sports from runaway commercialism as embodied by the likes of Vaccaro, who, since signing his pioneering shoe contract with Michael Jordan in 1984, had built sponsorship empires successively at Nike, Adidas, and Reebok. Not all the members could hide their scorn for the ?sneaker pimp? of schoolyard hustle, who boasted of writing checks for millions to everybody in higher education.
?Why,? asked Bryce Jordan, the president emeritus of Penn State, ?should a university be an advertising medium for your industry??
Vaccaro did not blink. ?They shouldn?t, sir,? he replied. ?You sold your souls, and you?re going to continue selling them. You can be very moral and righteous in asking me that question, sir,? Vaccaro added with irrepressible good cheer, ?but there?s not one of you in this room that?s going to turn down any of our money. You?re going to take it. I can only offer it.?

 

[BB73]

An interesting piece by Ramzy on the NCAA's rules and those that have broken them.

11W

 

[Muck]

I have been searching for this article for awhile and finally stumbled across it again (thanks to HuskerBoard)...

Football Players Receive $17,000 Annually in Cash, all within NCAA Rules

That's it. I have had it with the inane and redundant talk about NCAA football student-athletes, specifically football players, not being able pay for a tank of gas or afford a combo meal at Subway. Stop it! Enough is enough. These kids are given ample resources to 'survive' during their years on a college campus, and I will prove it to you. I will show you not only the value of a scholarship, but the cash and benefits student-athletes can get all within NCAA rules.

If this is your first time to Holy Turf, welcome. Let me give you some quick background information. I spent nine years working inside athletic departments at Arkansas and Baylor as an academic advisor for student-athletes. I have seen the inner workings of two athletic departments in two major conferences. Let's get back to the task at hand. I live in Fayetteville, Arkansas, the home of the Razorbacks. In this article, I am going to use Arkansas as my example.

Before we get to the value of a scholarship, let's start off with the amount of money available to football student-athletes within NCAA rules.

.../cont/...