The W
Views: 97648377
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
24.7.14 1811
The W - Football - Should College Athelets get paid?
This thread has 547 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 Next(1958 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (23 total)
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 min.
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#1 Posted on
Some have alluded to it in other posts, so what are your positions on this, and please explain with something more than "they make X amount of money for the college".
Promote this thread!
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1178 days
Last activity: 975 days
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
They do get the free ride on books, tuition and board. Sure college athletics is a multi-billion dollar industry. But that room and board, if put to good use, is plenty of compensation.

If we didn't have a situation where morons were coming to school to major in football(or what have you) and don't attend class or wind up with a degree, this wouldn't matter. I'm glad there are good stories like Obinna Ekezie who got his engineering and business degrees(in four years) from Maryland while he played hoops here.

If the "student-athlete" wants to piss away their education that's their problem. Come to think of it, it's my problem because some tax dollars went to pay for it.



TheCow
Landjager








Since: 3.1.02
From: Knoxville, TN

Since last post: 2359 days
Last activity: 2358 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.00
I read an article in the LA Times last week (I would link it up, but I believe that the link's expired) that said that student-athletes are a lot worse off than we think. (Also unfortunately, I don't remember the specific examples.) It's a lot harder life (in college) than we give them credit for.

As for paying them, while I'm not in favor of that, if the team wants to work out some kind of limited endorsement deal for a few of their marquee players, so long as the money is distributed towards the whole team, I don't see it as that big an issue. Yeah, it's probably tampering, but if I cooked one of the basketball players dinner, he couldn't accept it because it would be a NCAA violation. Pretty much anything seems to be tampering on one level or another. (As for distributing it to the whole team, it's not like, say, the offensive lineman's going to have deals rolling in left and right.)





Knoxville Lindy Exchange
chuckc14
Summer sausage








Since: 2.1.02
From: Nashville

Since last post: 3089 days
Last activity: 1477 days
#4 Posted on
Yes they should be paid...but only by their EMPLOYERS over the summer months. Great move a few years back by the NCAA to finally let the kids get summer jobs...long overdue.

And lets remember...only about a half dozen or so athletic departments even turn a profit, so saying "they make x amount of money for the school" just doesn't apply in most cases.





he's my basketball Jesus too...
Grimis
Scrapple








Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1178 days
Last activity: 975 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.29
If we start talking about NCAA rule changes, that's something that should be examined. A lot of them are asinine. You have to make sure that there is no toomfoolery going on, but these kids still have to live and they should be able to work if they have to.



BigVitoMark
Lap cheong








Since: 10.8.02
From: Queen's University, Canada

Since last post: 3287 days
Last activity: 3196 days
ICQ:  
#6 Posted on
I don't think "student-athlete" pissing away his education is the taxpayers' problem...the only sports that really have issues with kids not taking actual classes are football and basketball...and those sports are profitable. A volleyball player or a swimmer flunking out of school isn't worth the school's time, but a 1000 yard running back or a guard who can shoot three pointers can have a significant impact on the athletic department's bottom line.

I don't think the school should be able to give the players money in the form of a salary BUT the NCAA really needs to relax the rules on where the kids can get some extra cash. If they're allowed to have jobs during the year or accept money on the record from alumni (for example), I think the chances of kids relying on the dark elements (ie. gamblers) for money would become almost nil.
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#7 Posted on
I think they should. I just used this topic as my persuasive speech in speech class and actually changed my teacher's opinion on the topic. Although I'm sure you wieners are harder to convince.

Not only do they make money for the colleges in tv deals, tickets. But there's also merchandise and sponsorships by people like Nike. I mean these kids have to wear clothes by a certian company and then the school gets money for it but not the kids wearing it? Jerseys are sold in sports stores but the player who made the jersey famous get nothing. Coaches get paid millions of dollars when they are totally dependent on the players performance.

I know they get to go to school for free and a place to live and that's great dont get me wrong. But what about food? What about clothes? Laundry? Phone Bills? A social life? These are things kids still need money for and they a) don't get any money for playing and b) don't have time to get a part time job. Many players come from poor families and don't have any money to pay for these things. Also some players have wives and kids.

Because they don't have any money this forces players to leave early. Now I know that some people leave early just for greed and fame but I think less players would leave early if they had atleast a little bit of money to live off of in college. Also less people would take money from boosters, sure it'd still happen, but some people might honestly take money because they need it.

At the very least there should be some kind of budget controlled by the coaches to spend on their players. If there is some sort of budget already then it should be higher. Just take a look at some of Utah's violations recently. They got in trouble because Rick Majerus took one of his players to breakfast to tell him that his father died. Another player he bought a BAGEL for and that was against the rules. And another time the coaches took the players to the grocery store and bought groceries for them because they had no money. These things are just ridiculous, at the very least teams should be able to buy groceries for their players.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 min.
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#8 Posted on
Well, since I started the discussion, I think I should put my .02 in.

I think it is rediculous to even consider giving the student athelets payments. They are in school, of thier own free will, and are there to get an education. As a reward for thier athletic abilities, they get to go to some schools that they otherwise would never, EVER be accepted to, free of charge. They have thier classes, books, meals, medical expenses, and housing expenses paid for in exchange for playing a sport.

The argument that they need money to cover the expenses of laundry, and phone bills and thier social life is out of whack as well. If they are so busy that they cannot do anything but study and practice/play thier sports, they really dont have time for a social life. Besides if the tams QB walks into a party, is he really paying for a beer? Or is it given to him?


Four years at a public university will cost them approximately $115,000, according to Money Magazine's 1996 college guide. What will $115,000 buy you today? You can choose from a three-bedroom waterfront home in South Shore Harbour, five new Mazda Miatas, or 35,384 movie rentals from Blockbuster Video.

But if you decide to send your child to a private university, four years could cost as much as $250,000.

So, 115,000 in four years isnt enough of an investment in a college player? He is supposed to get all of that, AND money for "expenses"? And that is at PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
Private schools, such as Stanford, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, etc the average cost is $250,000. THats a QUATER OF A MILLION DOLLARS. NOt to mention the fact that after that, they should, SHOULD have a degree that they can apply to a career making enough money to live on comfortably for the rest of thier lives.

The fact that a college makes money off of shirts, hats, etc makes no difference. Because, four years from now, those student athelets are in a position to have decent careers, if they apply themselves. How many of you have a linemans Jersey anyway? Maybe a QB, RB or WR, a few Defensive players. But the AVERAGE player in the NCAA doesnt have his jersey mass produced, doesnt make the college a ton of money, and doesnt really lose out because of it.

Plus, much of the cash that any university recieves through its big money maker programs, football, basketball, etc, gets distributed throughout the school, benefiting other students, and other athletic programs.
Battlezone
Potato korv








Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2054 days
Last activity: 106 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#9 Posted on
Since I alluded to it before, I'll chime in as well...


    I think it is rediculous to even consider giving the student athelets payments. They are in school, of thier own free will, and are there to get an education. As a reward for thier athletic abilities, they get to go to some schools that they otherwise would never, EVER be accepted to, free of charge. They have thier classes, books, meals, medical expenses, and housing expenses paid for in exchange for playing a sport.


First of all, I think you go to college to prepare yourself for a career, not to get an education. But that's a debate for another day.

Anyway, that would be fine if they were the only students receiving full scholarship tuition. As it is, there are band students, chemistry majors, artists, etc. receiving full scholarships across the country. Furthermore, that band student, chemistry major or artist can make as much money working as they care to, year round. An athlete can only work during the summer, and then their earnings are capped. Also, a saxophone player in the college band can make money playing gigs at the local jazz club, using his talent to make money. A star running back can't do that.

Consider the case of the star Northwestern running back (his name escapes me) a few years ago. He was a theater major, and was offered a (paying) role in a stage play. NCAA said, "no way". So had he NOT chosen to play football, he could have taken the job. And for the record, he didn't make it to the NFL, so spare me the "well, he makes millions in the pros" argument.

My solution? I'd like to say, give them $200 a month, over the table, subsidized by the boosters. It's not enough to make the athletes rich, but it won't have them looking over their shoulders for the NCAA when someone wants to buy them a pizza.

However, the problem comes when you multiply $200 a month by the ENORMOUS number of athletes in a school. Ohio State has well over 100,000 students. I think a estimate of 10,000 athletes might even be a bit low. There's NO way to pay all of those students. And don't think you can get away just paying the basketball and football players, because the Title IX ladies will have a FIELD DAY with that.

The NCAA has TONS of rules in it's rule book that are no longer feasible nor realistic. The myth of the "amateur" athlete went out the door the instant the NCAA signed a multi-million dollar contract to put games on TV. It's time they changed with the times.

The question is, in my mind, how?



"So you're Ben Affleck. You're sitting next to Jennifer Lopez, who's your fiancee, you're eating a eight-foot high sundae, and members of the Boston Red Sox are coming up to you and asking for autographs. If that's not heaven, what is?" - Tony Kornheiser, PTI
drjayphd
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 22.4.02
From: Long Island

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#10 Posted on
Battlezone: Are you talking about Darnell Autry? I remember hearing that he retired from the NFL (he did catch on with a team) to pursue an acting career... then I think he came back when the Iggles needed a RB.



Today's Out-Of-Context Quote, Courtesy of hardygrrl:

"...between the grime layer and the Seventies game show host hair, I'd rather rim Undertaker after a White Castle/Schlitz bender."
Merc
Potato korv








Since: 3.1.02
From: Brisbane, Australia

Since last post: 1198 days
Last activity: 1176 days
#11 Posted on
They're basically getting paid to play with scholarships, as others have mentioned, many wouldn't be at college if not for the scholarship. Agents, endorsements etc should all be allowed as long as all interests are declared. How many students are realistically going to get endorsements worth a damn anyway?

Has anyone ever challenged the NCAA rules restricting employment, agents etc?



I'm a fat wannabe surfer
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#12 Posted on
Well if they are getting paid by scholarships to play football then what about everyone else who gets scholarships. The English major might get a scholarship too and get all that money given to them and all they have to do is go to class. But then the football player gets a scholarship for going to class AND working his ass of on the field, keeping in shape all year round, watching video tapes, etc.

I don't think giving the players enough to actually feed themselves is asking too much after all the hardwork they go through. Hell a Northwestern player DIED because of how hard they work.


I mean come on! Rick Majerus can't buy his player a BAGEL!?

(edited by Quezzy on 11.9.03 0008)


Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 min.
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#13 Posted on
    Originally posted by Quezzy
    Well if they are getting paid by scholarships to play football then what about everyone else who gets scholarships. The English major might get a scholarship too and get all that money given to them and all they have to do is go to class. But then the football player gets a scholarship for going to class AND working his ass of on the field, keeping in shape all year round, watching video tapes, etc.

    I don't think giving the players enough to actually feed themselves is asking too much after all the hardwork they go through. Hell a Northwestern player DIED because of how hard they work.


    I mean come on! Rick Majerus can't buy his player a BAGEL!?

    (edited by Quezzy on 11.9.03 0008)


Scholarships include meals at the school in most cases, so the "they cant feed themselves" line is crap.

And yes, they are going to school on a FOOTBALL SCHOLARSHIP, so they are expected to PLAY FOOTBALL (or whatever sport they are on scholarship for) so, for them to be asked to actually participate in the required activities that earned them a FREE RIDE TO SCHOOL, shouldnt be used as an example of why they need to be paid. An Academic SCholarship recipient gets to go to school for his ACADEMIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS. So, when he is there, he is expected to uphold a certain GPA, which is MUCH MUCH higher than what an athletic scholarship requires. So, he is up late at night, cramming for tests, taking extra classes, and in some cases, TUTORING COLLEGE ATHELETES. So, with all the "extra" work they put in, do they deserve money as well?

I cant afford to go to Villinova or to Penn State or to Notre Dame. But, if I could throw a ball, or run real fast, I could go for free. If I was paying my own way, I would have to buy books, but not if I could hit a three pointer. If I was paying my own way, I would have to pay for the schools medical insurance, but not if I swam really well.

Hell, any full time student is working thier ass off, if they are trying to graduate on time that is. Do we pay them as well? The ones that are paying thier own way to school, HAVE to work sometimes, so that they can AFFORD schooling. Saying that they "can make as much as they want" while football players cannot is, IMO, rediculous.

Oh, and that guy who died at Northwest last year died of an asthma attack. He could have had one sitting in his room, studying.

(edited by StaggerLee on 11.9.03 1344)
Broncolanche
Sujuk








Since: 2.6.03
From: Littleton, CO

Since last post: 1073 days
Last activity: 325 days
#14 Posted on
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Oh, and that guy who died at Northwest last year died of an asthma attack. He could have had one sitting in his room, studying.


I'm sure the strenuous physical activity made the attack worse.



"How did the Cards go 11-5? How did Emmie Smith rush for 1,400 yards? How did Jeff Blake become the No. 3 rated passer in the NFL? You dreamt it, that's how."

Ralph Wiley, ESPN Page 2, The Year of the Dragger (2003 NFC Preview)
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 min.
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#15 Posted on
Asthma attacks can, and do happen spontaniously. Not saying he wasnt working hard, just pointing out he could have eaten something he was allergic to and it produced an attack, or being around raw weed, or any number of things.
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 13 days
Last activity: 1 day
AIM:  
#16 Posted on
Seems kind of funny that the Athletic Dept. felt compelled to burn Rashidi Wheeler's medical records when his death was so innocuous.



Coming to Chicago Nov. 12...I am SO there! - Brenda Weiler

blogforamerica.com
Quezzy
Knackwurst








Since: 6.1.02
From: The Moon

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 3 hours
AIM:  
#17 Posted on
    Originally posted by StaggerLee

    So, with all the "extra" work they put in, do they deserve money as well?


    (edited by StaggerLee on 11.9.03 1344)


When the english major fills out a stadium full of thousands of people, yes they should.

When an English major gets their college a sponsorship by NIke then yes they should.

When I can go to the local sports store and buy a jersey with the English major's name on the back then yes they should.

And the line about not having enough food isn't crap because I know people in that situation personally.



Lance's Response:

THAT IS AWESOME!
Battlezone
Potato korv








Since: 27.2.03
From: Seattle, Washington

Since last post: 2054 days
Last activity: 106 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#18 Posted on
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    And yes, they are going to school on a FOOTBALL SCHOLARSHIP, so they are expected to PLAY FOOTBALL (or whatever sport they are on scholarship for) so, for them to be asked to actually participate in the required activities that earned them a FREE RIDE TO SCHOOL, shouldnt be used as an example of why they need to be paid. An Academic SCholarship recipient gets to go to school for his ACADEMIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS. So, when he is there, he is expected to uphold a certain GPA, which is MUCH MUCH higher than what an athletic scholarship requires. So, he is up late at night, cramming for tests, taking extra classes, and in some cases, TUTORING COLLEGE ATHELETES. So, with all the "extra" work they put in, do they deserve money as well?


But the school gets an extra benefit from that athlete being there as opposed to the student on an academic scholarship. Hell, even throwing the bowl money, the tournament money, and the TV money out the window, it's been shown that schools that have successful teams get a nice big bump in applications from potential students the following year. I'll try and find a link.

Hell, the only time University of Dayton got ANY sort of bump was when it was rumored that the Olsen Twins might be going there. Guillible bastards.


    I cant afford to go to Villinova or to Penn State or to Notre Dame. But, if I could throw a ball, or run real fast, I could go for free. If I was paying my own way, I would have to buy books, but not if I could hit a three pointer. If I was paying my own way, I would have to pay for the schools medical insurance, but not if I swam really well.


But if you were really intelligent (not to suggest that you AREN'T of course...), or could play the trombone, or any number of other talents, you could go for free as well. I guess I don't see your point.

What I don't think most people realize is that playing a college sport (at the Division 1 level) IS like having a full-time job, in most cases. Even with the NCAA cracking down on the number of practices, they're still practicing for several hours a day, and that doesn't include weight training, and film study. So even if they HAD the opportunity to get a part-time job, they couldn't.

drjay: Yes, I was thinking of Autry. Thanks for the clarification. I didn't realize he was in the NFL for a while.

Merc: I don't think anyone's challenged the NCAA on employment, but I'm sure the rulebook is worded such that they'd have THAT loophole closed. I do know that athletes are allowed to talk with agents, as long as they haven't signed with them, though.





"So you're Ben Affleck. You're sitting next to Jennifer Lopez, who's your fiancee, you're eating a eight-foot high sundae, and members of the Boston Red Sox are coming up to you and asking for autographs. If that's not heaven, what is?" - Tony Kornheiser, PTI
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 6 min.
Last activity: 6 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#19 Posted on
This should show how much money these people are really making for the schools:

INDIANAPOLIS - Virtually every NCAA school regularly loses money on its sports program, and spending more on athletics does not guarantee winning more.

In its first scientific study on the impact of spending on intercollegiate athletics, the NCAA said Thursday that its members spend an average of about 3.5 percent of their total budgets on sports.

NCAA president Myles Brand trumpeted Thursday's report as "myth-breaking." He said the governing body for college sports would continue to study connections between athletic spending and performance, academics, giving and other areas.

"The public has formed its opinions on spending in college sports by using assumptions on the extremes," Brand said during a teleconference with reporters.

The report challenged views on both sides of the spectrum - that greater spending on big-time college sports was either a "road to ruin" or a "road to riches," said Peter Orszag, an economist with the Brookings Institution in Washington.

The study also showed:

_ Greater spending on football and basketball produced neither an increase nor a decrease in a program's revenues, on average, over the study's eight-year time span.

_ Increased spending on football or men's basketball did not produce better winning percentages during the eight-year period, nor did higher winning percentages produce more revenues.

_ There was no correlation between increased spending and increases or decreases in the measurable academic quality of new students or alumni giving.

Brand recounted conversations with reporters or others in which they guessed that universities spend a quarter or a more of their total budgets on intercollegiate sports. A university with a $2 billion total budget, if it dedicated 3.5 percent to athletics, would spend $70 million.

"It's just not appreciated what the reality of the situation is," Brand said.

William C. Friday, the chairman of the Knight Foundation Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, disagreed. He suggested that talk of an "arms race" was supported by the high salaries that some college football and basketball coaches command, and by studies showing most Division I-A football programs had built new stadiums or substantially renovated existing ones.

Friday challenged the NCAA to compare spending on athletics with how much its members spend on undergraduate programs. Total institutional spending can include costly graduate programs in law or medicine, while almost every athlete is an undergraduate, he said.

"There has been a very substantial acceleration in the cost of fielding athletic teams," Friday, the president emeritus of the University of North Carolina, said from Chapel Hill, N.C. "We are spending a lot more money."

Brand said the NCAA can only study the effects of athletic spending and inform its members of the results but cannot influence how much schools spend on big-time sports.

"It's an institutional decision, and what kind of institution they want to be," Brand said. "We can't judge for individual institutions what their priorities should be."

The NCAA report was prepared by three independent economists and reviewed by peers, using information collected by the NCAA from 1993 to 2001.


ges7184
Lap cheong








Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL

Since last post: 81 days
Last activity: 4 days
#20 Posted on
To elaborate on the last two posts, yes the number college applications do go up at winning institutions. However, the caliber of student applying DOESN'T go up, and in fact can sometimes decline on average. Therefore the result is just more declines on admission, with the same quality of student as before.



Everything that is wrong in this world can be blamed on Freddie Prinze Jr.
Pages: 1 2 Next
Pages: 1 2 NextThread ahead: Panthers Vs. Bucs
Next thread: Ah, parity
Previous thread: NFL Week One Standings.
(1958 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Considering the NFL has the strongest and strictest drug-testing program of all the major professional sports, I'd think it would be highly unlikely that steroids played any role in this damned tragic event, especially with such a classy individual as Reg...
- Texas Kelly, Reggie White dead at 43 (2004)
Related threads: OVERRATED! - My "full o' shit" college football trash talking for the day... - Maurice Clarett - More...
The W - Football - Should College Athelets get paid?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.146 seconds.