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

[HailToMichigan]

Should they be able to sell their stuff: Sure. It's THEIR stuff. Either don't give them anything of value for playing the game until after their eligibility is up or continue with the bags of crap that most of them couldn't afford anyway and rings/trophies/gifts/charms but acknowledge that once it's in their possession it's theirs to do with as they please.

I have some sympathy for that argument but the obvious problem is that it surely leads to someone selling their used toilet paper for $10,000 (or something less extreme but you get the point) because boosters are using purchases like that as a cover for golden handshakes. Right now there's no legal way to give players money. Creating one is just opening a loophole through which all the money will flow. If you could put some kind of limitation on it - e.g., the player can sell something but he must sell it through the school or through an NCAA marketplace - it'd be more acceptable.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

I have some sympathy for that argument but the obvious problem is that it surely leads to someone selling their used toilet paper for $10,000 (or something less extreme but you get the point) because boosters are using purchases like that as a cover for golden handshakes.

Exactly what I've been saying for years...except for the used toilet paper part.

Right now there's no legal way to give players money.

Sure there is...it's called a stipend, which players already get.

 

[BUCKYLE]

I have some sympathy for that argument but the obvious problem is that it surely leads to someone selling their used toilet paper for $10,000 (or something less extreme but you get the point) because boosters are using purchases like that as a cover for golden handshakes. Right now there's no legal way to give players money. Creating one is just opening a loophole through which all the money will flow. If you could put some kind of limitation on it - e.g., the player can sell something but he must sell it through the school or through an NCAA marketplace - it'd be more acceptable.

They don't need a legal cover to cheat.

 

[HailToMichigan]

They don't need a legal cover to cheat.

No, it happens already, but the fact that no booster money is allowed does keep some of it away. If a way to funnel money from boosters to players were legalized, you can bet a whole lot more of it would show up.

Sure there is...it's called a stipend, which players already get.

Right....I should've clarified that I meant no legal way for players to get money from outside the program, short of a paying job (which we all know is already abused plenty - see Oklahoma.)

 

[zincfinger]

...the obvious problem is that it surely leads to someone selling their used toilet paper for $10,000...

This is only $9.99, and it's not even used.

 

[BUCKYLE]

This is only $9.99, and it's not even used.

If it's not used why does it have shit all over it?

 

[ScriptOhio]

Recent article an Indiana paper, published: Friday, Jul. 1, 2011:

Is paying college athletes worth the cost?

When it comes to the debate on whether or not to pay college athletes, Purdue basketball coach Matt Painter offers this thought:
"If you want to get paid, or think the system is wrong, go pro. That's what the pros are for."
.
.
.
The idea of paying athletes intrigues IU basketball coach Tom Crean-"I'm for anything that helps the players. That's the most important thing. If there's a way to find an ability to do that within reason, I'm for it."-but he's more in favor of helping the travel costs of players' parents.
​

.
.
.
For Butler this past season, which lost in the national championship game, that meant traveling to Washington D.C., New Orleans and Houston.

"Tournament travel for parents needs to be addressed," Painter says. "(In 2010) we found out Sunday night we're playing in Spokane Thursday at noon. You know what it's like getting airline tickets for that. How are players' parents supposed to pay for that? They want to watch their kids play. Some of our parents don't go. Some do. I don't think that's fair."
.
.
.
Then there's the question of how much to give players and whether athletes from money-making sports, primarily football and men's basketball, should get more than other athletes.​

​

http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/01/3742381/is-paying-college-athletes-worth.html

 

[BB73]

Recent article an Indiana paper, published: Friday, Jul. 1, 2011:

Is paying college athletes worth the cost?

When it comes to the debate on whether or not to pay college athletes, Purdue basketball coach Matt Painter offers this thought:
"If you want to get paid, or think the system is wrong, go pro. That's what the pros are for."
​

​

​

​

That's easy to tell basketball players, who really only need to stay eligible through one semester at college before they can go pro. College football players have to wait until they're 3 years out of high school.

 

[zincfinger]

[/LEFT]
[/COLOR][/LEFT]

That's easy to tell basketball players, who really only need to stay eligible through one semester at college before they can go pro. College football players have to wait until they're 3 years out of high school.

Does a player have to be any particular number of years out of high school to play in the UFL, the AFL, or the CFL? The average salaries in those leagues range, I believe, from about $50-80K.

 

[BB73]

Does a player have to be any particular number of years out of high school to play in the UFL, the AFL, or the CFL? The average salaries in those leagues range, I believe, from about $50-80K.

A good point - my comment only applied to the NFL.

 

[Captain Hindsight]

Getting a full-ride scholarship is compensation in itself. With that being said, it's clear that players struggle financially and that some form of measures need to be taken to allow these student-athletes to have enough capital to take care of their basic needs and occasional fun here and there. It's tough. Give them an extra student card/ID with an additional 150 dollars on it each month or something along those lines. With those guys practicing and studying as frequently as they do, $37.50/week might seem low, but that's enough money to get them by.

 

[zincfinger]

A good point - my comment only applied to the NFL.

Just to harp on it a little bit, it raises an interesting question. If Adrian Peterson had gone straight from HS to the UFL or CFL (I'm assuming you can do that, but I don't know), and put up big numbers for 3 years, would he have become a high first round NFL draft pick? I can only think of one player off the top of my head who did something similar to that (Eric Swann, who was drafted #6 overall after going semi-pro). I suspect Peterson would have been a high first-round draft pick under those circumstances, and that generally a lot of players could go that route without causing undue harm to their eventual draft status. And the fact that virtually no one does this suggests to me that the opportunity to get 3-5 years of free college education, play on national television, and potentially be lionized by hundreds of thousands if not millions of fans is worth more to these guys than $50-80K per year.

 

[muffler dragon]

The idea of paying athletes intrigues IU basketball coach Tom Crean-"I'm for anything that helps the players. That's the most important thing. If there's a way to find an ability to do that within reason, I'm for it."-but he's more in favor of helping the travel costs of players' parents.

While a valid point, I don't see how this concerns IU basketball or their AD in general.

 

[zincfinger]

[I'm] more in favor of helping the travel costs of players' parents.

While a valid point, I don't see how this concerns IU basketball or their AD in general.

Personally, I think it's a weak point. I have no doubt that parents of players want to watch their kids play live, and that some of them can't afford to do it for all road games, or can only afford it with difficulty. The simple fact is, we all have things in life that we would like to have, but either can't afford or can only afford with difficulty. Why should the desire of parents of college athletes to watch their kids compete be put in the privileged position of forcing other people to pay for it? There doesn't seem to be any justification to do it only for football and men's basketball, you'd have to do it for every sport. And travel costs aren't just airfare, you're talking hotels, perhaps food. And really, why just parents; why not grandparents, siblings? After awhile, you're talking some pretty serious money. Nothing whatsoever against players' parents, but I don't see what entitles them to see their kids play on other peoples' dimes.

 

[Muck]

So what we've learned is that college basketball coaches are basically idiots.