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

[Gatorubet]

When five or six major programs are under investigation, I'd say it sure as [censored] is CFB's problem.

Kyle, people like money. If you give them a little, they want more. The people who have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks will have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks more than the stipend you want to give them.

Only now they will have some cover for where they are getting money, and the mental/philosophical barrier on "why I should get paid" is now eliminated. You've crossed the line. Now they can ask why the starters get paid the same as the bench warmers.

They have the choice of going to college on their own dime. They have the option of going to college on academic scholarship. They have the option of serving and using the GI Bill. They can go to trade school and skip college. But if they choose to accept an athletic scholarship under known terms, then they need to abide by the terms or get the [censored] out. IMO.

 

[knapplc]

The people who have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks will have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks more than the stipend you want to give them.

This is almost exactly the reply I typed up before I decided to read the other posts.

The kind of kid who is willing to break a rule to get a little cash is going to do that whether they have all kinds of perks or all kinds of perks plus a stipend. Someone somewhere will always try to get away with something. It's a state of mind more than a state of poverty.

 

[BUCKYLE]

Kyle, people like money. If you give them a little, they want more. The people who have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks will have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks more than the stipend you want to give them.

Only now they will have some cover for where they are getting money, and the mental/philosophical barrier on "why I should get paid" is now eliminated. You've crossed the line. Now they can ask why the starters get paid the same as the bench warmers.

They have the choice of going to college on their own dime. They have the option of going to college on academic scholarship. They have the option of serving and using the GI Bill. They can go to trade school and skip college. But if they choose to accept an athletic scholarship under known terms, then they need to abide by the terms or get the [censored] out. IMO.

Well fuck yourself for implying that the tOSU players had no qualms about "endangering the program". I really doubt they thought it thru to the point of "this may get ORD to rally for a Wexner maid service and the death penalty for tOSU, but I needs me some kicks!". Ridiculous.

A fair allowance would also allow the NCAA to seriously crack down on offenders who just "want more" without mostly reasonable people like me claiming they are crooks.

 

[WolverineMike]

then 5* joe schmoe is mad because his allowance is the same as 3* joe schmoe and the problem begins again.


I don't think there will ever be a right answer to this question.

 

[knapplc]

Well fuck yourself for implying that the tOSU players had no qualms about "endangering the program". I really doubt they thought it thru to the point of "this may get ORD to rally for a Wexner maid service and the death penalty for tOSU, but I needs me some kicks!". Ridiculous.

The alternative is that the Tat Five are either stupid, naive or so inattentive that they could barely be counted on to pass a single class, none of which is remotely true. They've all sat through several NCAA compliance meetings. They knew (or should have known) that what they were doing was an NCAA violation. Armed with that knowledge, you're saying it never occurred to them that their actions were an endangerment to the program? No way.

 

[Buckeye513]

The alternative is that the Tat Five are either stupid, naive or so inattentive that they could barely be counted on to pass a single class, none of which is remotely true. They've all sat through several NCAA compliance meetings. They knew (or should have known) that what they were doing was an NCAA violation. Armed with that knowledge, you're saying it never occurred to them that their actions were an endangerment to the program? No way.

Probably not. Typically when people do shit they know they're not supposed to do, they don't plan on getting caught.

 

[alexhortdog95]

I think it's ridiculous to tell a kid that he/she can't try to supply themselves the best way they know how HONESTLY while they're in school simply because they're athletes.

When I was in school, I worked full time AND went to school....and got help from the folks at my job during my schooling too. The current job I have now has tuition reimbursement for going to school.

if the school can rake in bazillions of dollars on the likeness of athletes, then why wouldn't those athletes be able to reasonably benefit from that? You can't treat academic scholarship winners the same as athletic scholarship winners, but that's what the NCAA says they are striving for, while pocketing all the dollars that are made.

Not to mention, if an athlete, say, blows their knee out or injures themselves in a way that they can't professionally do the sport they're currently in - how are they treated? They still have to suppliment their income SOMEHOW.

 

[Gatorubet]

When five or six major programs are under investigation, I'd say it sure as [censored] is CFB's problem.

Well [censored] yourself for implying that the tOSU players had no qualms about "endangering the program".

My apologies. I should have said that the guys at the other five or six programs had no qualms about endangering their programs, and that your confused scholar athletes were unsure of the negative ramifications of selling their stuff, being bereft of any information about its impropriety.

 

[BUCKYLE]

My apologies. I should have said that the guys at the other five or six programs had no qualms about endangering their programs, and that your confused scholar athletes were unsure of the negative ramifications of selling their stuff, being bereft of any information about its impropriety.

Well, the fact that all five players chose to return to school and take the punishment proves to me that even tho they broke the rules, it was hardly a "fuck the program, I'ma do me" kind of thing. But again, fuck you for acting like there's no difference between asking a fucking school for payment to attend and guys like Boom and A.J. Green.

 

[Gatorubet]

Kyle, I was obviously responding to the larger question of kids throughout the country on athletic scholarship trying to get some money. If you want to bring this down to just the tat-five you can, but if you want to do that, then you need to let me see their banks accounts and monthly spending habits so we can have the micro discussion as to whether they really need more money than they can get from Pell Grants and student loans.

If we talk big picture, then my general premise still holds: kids who want money will want more money. Kids who break rules will break rules, even if you give them a stipend.

Feel free to somehow make this a slam on your program and get mad at me.

 

[alexhortdog95]

Well, the fact that all five players chose to return to school and take the punishment proves to me that even tho they broke the rules, it was hardly a "fuck the program, I'ma do me" kind of thing. But again, fuck you for acting like there's no difference between asking a fucking school for payment to attend and guys like Boom and A.J. Green.

I don't think that when they did what they did, they were giving the finger to JT and the tOSU. They were only being typical kids (who are actually grown assed men) and thinking only of what was right in front of them. When you're 18 - 25, most tend to do that. Then, when you look back on your life, you're like, "What in the [Trev Alberts] was I doing?!? That was so stooooopid of me."

I think of when the credit card companies target young college kids and a kid says, "Wow....that's the most $$$ I've ever seen in my life," but don't know that they're getting ready to be done up by the CC company. After they go through hell with the CC company, they're better at credit (most are) management because of it.

 

[Steve19]

Kyle, people like money. If you give them a little, they want more. The people who have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks will have no problem endangering a program for a few bucks more than the stipend you want to give them.

Only now they will have some cover for where they are getting money, and the mental/philosophical barrier on "why I should get paid" is now eliminated. You've crossed the line. Now they can ask why the starters get paid the same as the bench warmers.

They have the choice of going to college on their own dime. They have the option of going to college on academic scholarship. They have the option of serving and using the GI Bill. They can go to trade school and skip college. But if they choose to accept an athletic scholarship under known terms, then they need to abide by the terms or get the [censored] out. IMO.

That said, Kyle's idea of a stipend has some merit.

Unethical behavior often is motivated by a sense of unfairness and differs across individuals depending on their personality characteristics (e.g., personality traits related to risk-taking).

I don't think that psychological research would support the notion that at least some players, who currently feel that the system is unfair, would not feel that a stipend would make things more fair. After all, they are acting out to restore a "more fair" outcome. Thus, their unethical behavior is intended to restore a more ethical outcome to their own benefit.

We can speculate whether a stipend would be perceived to be "fair" by every player, I think not, which would depend on the size of the stipend, of course. So, a stipend makes some sense, depending on its size and whether universities can afford it.

The real problem is the frame of fairness in which players are making their judgements of fairness. Under Title IX, universities have to use "cash cow" sports to support less profitable sports that are supported in order to achieve gender equality (primarily). Thus, universities have to look at profitability across the system. Players (and business school professors) hate being treated like cash cows, but unfortunately, it's a fact of life.

 

[zwem]

They are at "some disadvantage". If I'm a computer prodigy, studying at tOSU, IBM can pay me a million dollars to work for them. A football player can't even teach kids at a camp and get paid for it.

Just give the [censored]ing kids an allowance. Just enough to buy some clothes and take a girl on a date.

Well athletes also have an advantage with contacts and the alumni after graduating school. I'm sure the ones that don't make pro ball have an advantage finding a job due to alumni and contacts they have at their disposal. Trust me, having contacts is everything and it comes down to not what you know.....but who you know.

I'm on the fence with the allowance. I wouldn't mind it considering that the NCAA is the biggest pimp and blood sucker there is. The athletes are just the hoes to them IMO. However, it's not going to fix boosters from giving players money or other items. There is still going to be scandals and such. Also, who pays the players the money? How much money?

I think players should sell their stuff. There has to be a few limits because it can be taken advantage of but I saw nothing wrong with the buckeye players selling their stuff.

 

[Diego-Bucks]

Question:

Does a walk-on football player, or a non-athletic scholarship football player in general, have the same NCAA eligibility rules as a scholarship athlete?

If Mike Adams were on an academic scholarship or was paying his own way through school, could a booster give him cash, or could IBM pay him $1million for services rendered?

I'm just curious, because if there is a walk-on or a non-scholarship athlete, they are (or they would seem to me) a member of the general student population and I would think they could utilize the benefits associated with being a general student: such as selling their own property for cash, or accepting money from strangers.

 

[alexhortdog95]

Question:

Does a walk-on football player, or a non-athletic scholarship football player in general, have the same NCAA eligibility rules as a scholarship athlete?

If Mike Adams were on an academic scholarship or was paying his own way through school, could a booster give him cash, or could IBM pay him $1million for services rendered?

I'm just curious, because if there is a walk-on or a non-scholarship athlete, they are (or they would seem to me) a member of the general student population and I would think they could utilize the benefits associated with being a general student: such as selling their own property for cash, or accepting money from strangers.

That's a good question. Tell ya what. I'll contact the NCAA on this one directly and let you know what the answer is.