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

[Jeffcat]

Athletes do get paid: Full tuition, books, and a monthly living stipend if they don't line in the free dorms...not to mention team meals.

my points exactly and im a college student. i dunno what they get on top of all that. i think they are allotted like an extra 500 a month either for theirs to spend or for things like swipes on buck id. either way in the end they are getting paid a crapload of money compared to other students. id say easily 50-60 grand over a 4 year span.

 

[scooter1369]

Estimated that the average college athlete on scholarship earns $125,000 while in school for four years

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

Robert Smith addressed this topic in an interview with the Plain Dealer. The link was originally provided by 'grad' in Robert's Thread, but I'm copying it here because his point is, I think, unique.

Link

Given all the big contracts these coaches are getting, and all the money the schools are getting from BCS bowl games, the NCAA really needs to look into some sort of system analogous to workers' compensation for the players. If they have an acute injury, that's going to be taken care of. But if a player needs a knee replacement 15, 20 years down the road, and it's directly related to his playing days, something like that should be covered. Some of the NCAA's money should be put toward the long-term quality of health of its players.

 

[scooter1369]

Robert Smith addressed this topic in an interview with the Plain Dealer. The link was originally provided by 'grad' in Robert's Thread, but I'm copying it here because his point is, I think, unique.

Link

Spoken like a true med school student. Man, he was so much smarter than people gave him credit for.

 

[Jeffcat]

Robert Smith addressed this topic in an interview with the Plain Dealer. The link was originally provided by 'grad' in Robert's Thread, but I'm copying it here because his point is, I think, unique.

Link

well thats understandable and they could be put under a long term insurance plan for those specific injuries but pay to play isnt what im goin for cause they are already getting paid to play with free tuition, housing, food, etc.

 

[AJHawkfan]

Originally Posted by Robert Smith
Given all the big contracts these coaches are getting, and all the money the schools are getting from BCS bowl games, the NCAA really needs to look into some sort of system analogous to workers' compensation for the players. If they have an acute injury, that's going to be taken care of. But if a player needs a knee replacement 15, 20 years down the road, and it's directly related to his playing days, something like that should be covered. Some of the NCAA's money should be put toward the long-term quality of health of its players.

This is one of the best ideas I've ever heard.

 

[Mike80]

I personally think they should be allowed to have endorsements or get money for autographs.

They won't ever be paid by the schools. That's too much of a Pandoras box. and honestly I don't think they should be.

But if they are good enough, they should be able to receive endorsements and take certain gifts without having to worry about NCAA sanctions. Case in point, that spaghetti dinner that Beanie Wells and Pittman were at should be ok, so long as the PLAYERS don't receive the money, but their parents get it for the specific purpose of going to Glendale.

The NCAA rules are a bit outdated and didn't quite anticipate the bowls/college football/college basketball to generate this kind of money.

 

[IronBuckI]

I personally think they should be allowed to have endorsements or get money for autographs.

Talk about a pandora's box. Yeesh. At least if the schools paid them, which they do in the form of schollies and stipends, it would be regulated. Endorsements and money for autographs would be a very shady way of paying players.

 

[calibuck]

Pay one, Pay all

Folks, I think we're all agreeing in the short picture. However, to take the long view, one must look at the schollies given in other sports. The big bucks in college football are enormous, yes, and the athletes earn 'em for their alma maters. The time that they put in is a tremendous amount, and I'm pretty sure I couldn't have gotten through college if I had an athletic scholarship, what with the drinking and wenching (tried by golly) and occasional studying.

But why wouldn't the flute player on scholarship not be entitled to some money also? I believe she would. Also the track people, soccer people, fencing, syncro swimmers, etc. all should get some money.

The cost of an education is enormous, as well as housing, meals, and books (to say nothing of the special tutoring, study tables) permissible by NCAA regs. PS, does that flute/soccer/baseball player get the special tutoring that football players do? I'll bet that the requirements of those sports are just as demanding (timewise).

Consider why paying a stipend is a 'pandora's box'. The cost of say, $500 per month per athlete/schollarship person would be huge. Could colleges pay it? Sure they could, but in some colleges, as well as OSU, some of the athletic programs would be cut (Title IX excluded). The decision to fight the payment of pocket money is because of that. PS, most colleges are not as well-heeled as OSU sports, and I believe that our university has the MOST inter-collegiate and club sports on the planet. The money from football and basketball funds those non-revenue sports, and gives athletes in those sports "free" educations - and they might not otherwise get them.

Look at the problem from one of parity, not equity. :gobucks3: :gobucks4:

 

[strohs]

scholarships = $$$$$$$$$

 

[BB73]

sportsline

NCAA's settlement with ex-athletes approved in court

INDIANAPOLIS -- A federal court has approved the settlement between the NCAA and 12,000 former student-athletes seeking reimbursements for educational expenses, resume preparation and career counseling.

NCAA officials announced Thursday that the U.S. district court in Los Angeles had approved the proposal Tuesday.

As part of the deal, the NCAA will create a $10 million fund for former student-athletes, thousands of whom joined in the class-action lawsuit. Those students, who attended school between Feb. 17, 2002 and Aug. 4, 2008, have three years to file claims with the NCAA.

As part of the deal, the NCAA denied it any wrongdoing in the case and said it agreed to settle to avoid additional expenses.

 

[Ttown]

No.

 

[MaxBuck]

Stipends Are Not the Answer

With all the current brouhaha in Columbus, it was inevitable that the talking heads would resurrect the tired argument that D1 football players should receive "stipends" (read: salaries) because of the "millions of dollars they're generating for their universities." These pundits typically also suggest that players would be less likely to engage in selling rings, jerseys, etc. if they were getting some coin-for-play.

Hogwash.

1. Why should football players receive stipends and, say, track athletes or tennis players not? The whole idea of an athletic department is to provide student-athletes the opportunity to develop holistically, and both schoolwork and teamwork are learning experiences. To the extent you pay footballers, you can't support as many student-athletes in other sports, which is counter to the interest of developing as many student-athletes as possible. And there isn't enough money floating around to pay everyone.

2. Why does anyone believe that stipends will serve as inoculation against greed? If Joe Quarterback is getting $2,000 a month, does anyone seriously believe he'll be less tempted to sell an old jersey he can get another $2,000 for? If anything, such stipends would encourage an environment of "pay for play" that would exacerbate the current problems.

I don't have any perfect answers, but stipends are not among them.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

With all the current brouhaha in Columbus, it was inevitable that the talking heads would resurrect the tired argument that D1 football players should receive "stipends" (read: salaries) because of the "millions of dollars they're generating for their universities." These pundits typically also suggest that players would be less likely to engage in selling rings, jerseys, etc. if they were getting some coin-for-play.

Hogwash.

1. Why should football players receive stipends and, say, track athletes or tennis players not? The whole idea of an athletic department is to provide student-athletes the opportunity to develop holistically, and both schoolwork and teamwork are learning experiences. To the extent you pay footballers, you can't support as many student-athletes in other sports, which is counter to the interest of developing as many student-athletes as possible. And there isn't enough money floating around to pay everyone.

2. Why does anyone believe that stipends will serve as inoculation against greed? If Joe Quarterback is getting $2,000 a month, does anyone seriously believe he'll be less tempted to sell an old jersey he can get another $2,000 for? If anything, such stipends would encourage an environment of "pay for play" that would exacerbate the current problems.

I don't have any perfect answers, but stipends are not among them.

they already get a stipend, something just shy of a grand to cover food/housing once they leave the dorms. id prefer the return of nonscholarship athletes to the slippery slopes of stipend athletes...

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I absolutely agree. Given our current economic environment, I'd much rather see any loose funds diverted to the general student body's scholarship fund than give athletes a dime worth of pocket money.

Also what about the majority of athletic departments in the country that lose money...that have to rely on subsidies from the university's general fund and "student fees" to break even. Are you going to soak the general student body for even more "fees" so that an athlete can have a little spending money.

The real solution is an NFL funded d-league where someone who has no desire to be in--and no business being in--a college classroom can go off and make 35 or 40K a year while honing his skills for a shot at the NFL.