It doesn’t pay to play Division I ball

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

I don't see it as exploited. I see it as a fair exchange. It doesn't bother me, not even a little, that they get no piece of that cash.

I agree with others that the pro leagues need to drop age restrictions. No reason for Dwayne Wade to pretend he's a student.

It stopped being a fair exchange when coaches salaries reached the millions, TV rights reached hundreds of millions, and the total revenue reached billions.

Its an archaic system where its no longer fair exchange.

You are no advocate for the cartel when it comes to the BCS, why stop there? Its obvious the cartel has infiltrated every level of the corporate structure.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

It's exploitation and it gets worse the better the player is.

They do get some compensation, but I'd rather have 50k in cash and allowed to do whatever I want with it, than 50k put towards an "education." Even though I realize most of the kids would blow the money on dumb shit.

I'd guess a huge % of these kids either: don't want/need the education or don't get full value because the sport interferes with it.

If they don't want/need the education, then its the school being exploited, not the athlete.

Every school could be making a billion dollars per game, and I still would not support paying the players. Its absurd.

You guys are advocating turning this into professional sports with no pretense of being students. First of all, its not fair to the real student athletes. Second, you only seem to be concerned with the big time players at big schools. Its short sighted and caters to a tiny percentage of players.

Instead of catering to the future pros with no desire to be in school, clean up the whole mess. Remove the age restrictions. Make them take real classes. Hold them to the same academic standards as the rest of the student body. This will keep Frank Gore out of school, and you will have real atudent athletes who are not being "exploited" (you guys are nuts, they aren't entitled to shit, but whatever I'll play along) because they are actually there to learn.

Your solution is akin to having a daughter who breaks curfew, so to "fix" it you make her curfew later. Lazy answer.

 

[mcstl25]

The school can't pay the players, but I agree that the NCAA should look the other way when players receive gifts from boosters or sell their own property. That would solve a lot of the problems.

 

[ralaw]

I use to be against paying them, which I still am, because I just don't think its reasonable to expect universities to pay every single athlete on campus. However, I wonder why they don't let athletes take in endorsement money. If an athlete is good enough to earn an endorsement deal then let him make it. I understand the whole amateurism thing, but this isn't 1950 anymore.......times are different. The system is so corrupt now it really doesn't matter anymore. Grad students who work for the school getting grants generally earn money for their work, so athletes should be treated the same.

 

[ralaw]

Might as well start paying the best High School athletes right?

:facepalm:

I remember when Percy Harvin was in highschool. My wife teaches at his former school, so we basically went to all of the games (and still do). During the Harvin days every single game whether it was on the road or not was a sellout. It got so bad that they started playing some of his game at a local college. During this time the district made A LOT of money. Now the school is lucky to have 400 people at a game. This is the same situation at EJ Manuel's former highschool.

IMO this whole situation is just the way it is. If you're an amateur athlete you play a sport and people pay to watch it. Its just the way it is. If you have an issue with that then you hoped to one day make it as a professional and earn money.

 

[Bear Pand]

If they don't want/need the education, then its the school being exploited, not the athlete.

No the athletes are getting paid with something that has little value to them. And they're just supposed to deal with it cause it worked in 1832 or whenever these rules were implemented.

Every school could be making a billion dollars per game, and I still would not support paying the players. Its absurd.

I don't see how you can say this when you constantly rag on the BCS for being a racket for the ppl that run bowls. This shit is a racket too.

You guys are advocating turning this into professional sports with no pretense of being students. First of all, its not fair to the real student athletes. Second, you only seem to be concerned with the big time players at big schools. Its short sighted and caters to a tiny percentage of players.

I wish people would quit with the peekaboo "student-athlete" bullshit. That label only comes up out of convenience. Big time Div 1 football and basketball doesn't have anything to do with academics. Whole thing is a farce.

Instead of catering to the future pros with no desire to be in school, clean up the whole mess. Remove the age restrictions. Make them take real classes. Hold them to the same academic standards as the rest of the student body. This will keep Frank Gore out of school, and you will have real atudent athletes who are not being "exploited" (you guys are nuts, they aren't entitled to shit, but whatever I'll play along) because they are actually there to learn.

Me saying they're being exploited doesn't mean I think they're entitled to anything. I agree with the rest though but it'll never happen because these schools love letting the Frank Gores, Derrick Roses etc. in because of the revenue it gets them. Fans love it too much too.

 

[Sportsbuck]

No the athletes are getting paid with something that has little value to them.

If they aren't smart enough to realize the value of an education, especially a free one where you can come out of it in four years without a ridiculous amount of student loans hanging over you for the next 15-30 years, that's their own fault.

 

[citizenerased]

Yes, the college degree they were given like 5-6 hours a day to actually focus on and by and large had most of the work done for them by tutors.

And lets please not forget receiving a piece of those bulk t-shirt orders. Oh boy.

5-6 hours a day and they complaining they don't have enough time? I can't remember a period outside of exam and essay time when I do 5-6 hours of study outside of lectures and tutorials/workshops a week.

Who are these spastics and how did they pass the entrance exam.

I use to be against paying them, which I still am, because I just don't think its reasonable to expect universities to pay every single athlete on campus. However, I wonder why they don't let athletes take in endorsement money. If an athlete is good enough to earn an endorsement deal then let him make it. I understand the whole amateurism thing, but this isn't 1950 anymore.......times are different. The system is so corrupt now it really doesn't matter anymore. Grad students who work for the school getting grants generally earn money for their work, so athletes should be treated the same.

Yep, best solution for all. Solves the problem of the Third String QB at Southern Alaska Tech or the Female Soccer Players bitching about not getting Cam Newton money.

 

[Senser81]

Secondly, the excuse of "...they get a free education that is worth upwards of 40K-50K per year..." The high end of that number comprises of maybe...2% of athletes. Unless you are going to a high end private school, your tuition bill per year isn't touching 50K. University of Miami? Sure. FIU? The bill is...3K-5K a year?

So, to solve the problem, lets pay the 2rd-string FIU punter $121,000 a year!

If Villanova's football program loses money every year, can they expect the players to pay the University $121,000 a year for the opportunity to play?

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

So, to solve the problem, lets pay the 2rd-string FIU punter $121,000 a year!

If Villanova's football program loses money every year, can they expect the players to pay the University $121,000 a year for the opportunity to play?

No...I already said paying student-athletes on some sort of wage on the books is a terrible idea, never mind it not being feasible.

 

[Senser81]

How much revenue do you generate for the university?

Fuck this noise. At U of Illinois when they wanted to renovate the football stadium, they tacked on a $250 "athletic fee" to student tuition, where it remained in perpetuity.

So, how much revenue do I generate for the university? Quite a bit when I was a student. Tuition, board, books, etc. And that was straight cash, homey.

 

[Senser81]

As somebody mentioned, then maybe the NFL should set up their own minor league structure where they can develop their own players, as opposed to using college ball and essentially forcing dummies into schools when they don't belong.

Good luck with that, but it would fix some of this.

Why would the NFL need a minor league system when Tavaris Jackson is already on the Seahawks?

 

[Senser81]

No...I already said paying student-athletes on some sort of wage on the books is a terrible idea, never mind it not being feasible.

Yeah, I didn't really read the whole thread. Just saw something I could jab you with.

I would assume that elite athletes like Cam Newton or Glen Rice are worth quite a bit of money to the University in ticket sales, merchandise, bowl game/tournament bonuses, etc. I would rather the universities make these athletes "student workers" and also be employees of the university in addition to being a student, or at the very least give them a small stipend.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Yeah, I didn't really read the whole thread. Just saw something I could jab you with.

I would assume that elite athletes like Cam Newton or Glen Rice are worth quite a bit of money to the University in ticket sales, merchandise, bowl game/tournament bonuses, etc. I would rather the universities make these athletes "student workers" and also be employees of the university in addition to being a student, or at the very least give them a small stipend.

 

 

[Villain]

On a daily basis not sure how it operates but I can try and find out from some guys on the team/former players if you are really interested.

I'm interested!

http://www.virtualsportsdaily.com/forum/showthread.php?t=108534

 

[Anthony]

 

[Shwayzed]

You do not see this kind of wide spread issue and debate in regards to hockey, baseball, track and field, tennis, etc.

The issue is really with two sports...the biggest money makers for colleges...football and basketball...the two sports that demand you go to college before you can play.

Kids that go to school for hockey and baseball go to school because they want to, not because they have to, necessarily. Otherwise, they go to the minors and play or go overseas and play.

Right now, you have kids that go to school only because they have to, to get to where they want to go.

If you look at it that way, it makes them just like any other college student.

We're here to get an education/degree so we can get to where we want to go.

 

[Fox1994]

I think it's a real interesting note that - according to the article LL put up - the moniker 'student-athlete' derives from the NCAA trying to avoid giving workmen's comp money to the widow of a former athlete. It was created and has been used to avoid liability.

 

“We crafted the term student-athlete,” Walter Byers himself wrote, “and soon it was embedded in all NCAA rules and interpretations.” The term came into play in the 1950s, when the widow of Ray Dennison, who had died from a head injury received while playing football in Colorado for the Fort Lewis A&M Aggies, filed for workmen’s-compensation death benefits. Did his football scholarship make the fatal collision a “work-related” accident? Was he a school employee, like his peers who worked part-time as teaching assistants and bookstore cashiers? Or was he a fluke victim of extracurricular pursuits? Given the hundreds of incapacitating injuries to college athletes each year, the answers to these questions had enormous consequences. The Colorado Supreme Court ultimately agreed with the school’s contention that he was not eligible for benefits, since the college was “not in the football business.”

Anyway, it seems unjust that the NCAA and the universities profit more from the performance of the players than the players profit from their experience with the university. That said, the point has been very well made that it's very possibly more the NFL's fault than any other body's. I just find it very irresponsible of the NCAA when they're supposed to be a non-profit organization.

I'm all for the endorsement idea.

 

[Sigona]

At what schools? Not my experience with players I've known at various schools like NIU, U of Ill, U of Iowa, Notre Dame, here in the midwest etc.

I sit behind the Rutgers QB and long-snapper in my intro to media systems class. :yep:.

 

[MvP]

I use to be against paying them, which I still am, because I just don't think its reasonable to expect universities to pay every single athlete on campus. However, I wonder why they don't let athletes take in endorsement money. If an athlete is good enough to earn an endorsement deal then let him make it. I understand the whole amateurism thing, but this isn't 1950 anymore.......times are different. The system is so corrupt now it really doesn't matter anymore. Grad students who work for the school getting grants generally earn money for their work, so athletes should be treated the same.

This is exactly what I came in here to say. In no way should the universities be paying these student-athletes, but if Under Armour wants to come in and offer someone (from any collegiate sport) an endorsement deal, I don't see why that would be an issue.

Like Atlas said, these student-athletes are pampered enough as it is on campus. I see this even at my D1-AA school, where during the winter you can find every player on the basketball team wearing brand new Dre Beats and Steep Tech NorthFace jackets. The easiest classes I've taken were the ones that were filled with athletes. They are allowed to pick their schedule almost a week before everyone else and their advisor picks out the easiest professors for them. All of their GPAs should be at least a 3.0 because of this, so finding a job after college shouldn't be TOO hard.