Fo those who ardently protect the "student-athlete" model:

[OttoinGrotto]

The reference to salaries was to outside employment.

cool beans, gotcha

 

[xc84]

The student model is fine. The players receive the opportunity for an education that they would otherwise pay hundred of thousands of dollars for. Medical expenses that result from an injury at practice or a game should be covered by the school. If they are not at some schools, change that to be a requirement.

The Ivys are no different by the way. They have athletes who get injured too.

 

[Eric15]

pay every kid 50K across the board in every sport that gets a scholie and have them pay for room/board/tuition like everyone else, then everyone wins.

What if a school can't afford to do that for all it's varsity sports?

 

[HtownOrange]

if you pay the kids and remove the college loyalty then dont you just become minor league sports and who goes to watch that at any level?

pay every kid 50K across the board in every sport that gets a scholie and have them pay for room/board/tuition like everyone else, then everyone wins.

Paying each kid $50k would chase kids away from private schools and into the Big State U's.

Besides, free tuition, books, fees, room and board is already covered. That in truth is a form of compensation. Though insurance should be included (and is, or at least medical coverage if not outright insurance at many schools).

 

[bcubs9497]

Paying each kid $50k would chase kids away from private schools and into the Big State U's.

Besides, free tuition, books, fees, room and board is already covered. That in truth is a form of compensation. Though insurance should be included (and is, or at least medical coverage if not outright insurance at many schools).

Our insurance covers Steven. Whatever our insurance doesn't pay is covered by the university. I assume it's the same thing at other programs.

 

[upperdeck]

Paying each kid $50k would chase kids away from private schools and into the Big State U's.

Besides, free tuition, books, fees, room and board is already covered. That in truth is a form of compensation. Though insurance should be included (and is, or at least medical coverage if not outright insurance at many schools).

but since you already have limits just how many more would it chase ? its not like OSU/Alabama could add a better class then they already get?

 

[HtownOrange]

Our insurance covers Steven. Whatever our insurance doesn't pay is covered by the university. I assume it's the same thing at other programs.

Probably, so, as a means of shifting some costs away from the university. I know many schools offered insurance to all students, but that was before ACA, I don't know whether they still do so now as kids can be covered until age 26.

 

[HtownOrange]

but since you already have limits just how many more would it chase ? its not like OSU/Alabama could add a better class then they already get?

How many kids are going to choose to lose money or make far less going to a private school when they can make money at a state school? Ex. Cost of attendance at a State U in Texas is about $16K-$17K/year. At $50, a player will net $33K (before taxes). Compare that with private universities. Kids will opt to attend lesser state schools if they need money (which even if they don't, most 18 year olds will perceive that they do).

 

[skurey]

How many kids are going to choose to lose money or make far less going to a private school when they can make money at a state school? Ex. Cost of attendance at a State U in Texas is about $16K-$17K/year. At $50, a player will net $33K (before taxes). Compare that with private universities. Kids will opt to attend lesser state schools if they need money (which even if they don't, most 18 year olds will perceive that they do).

Would help lower the ridiculous tuition at private schools. Two birds with one stone.

 

[HtownOrange]

Would help lower the ridiculous tuition at private schools. Two birds with one stone.

Not really. State schools often cost as much per student, the difference being that the infrastructure and often annual support is paid for by the State (read: state taxpayers). Some state schools are losing funding, but they often have much of their infrastructure in place and paid for and often have sizeable endowments on which to fall back upon. Private schools are responsible for nearly everything they have, but not always (Thanks NYS for the Dome).

 

[upperdeck]

How many kids are going to choose to lose money or make far less going to a private school when they can make money at a state school? Ex. Cost of attendance at a State U in Texas is about $16K-$17K/year. At $50, a player will net $33K (before taxes). Compare that with private universities. Kids will opt to attend lesser state schools if they need money (which even if they don't, most 18 year olds will perceive that they do).

this only applies to kids going to in state schools though.. out of state kids going to texas still pay 50K. you could also force every school to charge athletes the same amount to attend to make it apples to apples which is something they should already being doing .

 

[SWC75]

Brent Axe is talking about this right now:

Value of Syracuse basketball player exceeds $1 million a year, according to Business Insider

Brent doesn't think player should be paid a salary but he thinks they should be able to profit from endorsements, at least.

 

[NJCuse97]

Not really. State schools often cost as much per student, the difference being that the infrastructure and often annual support is paid for by the State (read: state taxpayers). Some state schools are losing funding, but they often have much of their infrastructure in place and paid for and often have sizeable endowments on which to fall back upon. Private schools are responsible for nearly everything they have, but not always (Thanks NYS for the Dome).

Actually I learned that apart from political cache, SU gave up some very big assets to get state funding (free, but not free). Under pressure from some fairly powerful preservation organizations, the state required ownership of the many Adirondack Camps that had been gifted to SU over the years. Remember this was not that long after the Penn Station MSG fiasco that remains a huge black eye for state and federal funding of "public works" projects and private entity partnerships.

 

[sufandu]

I think it's time to get rid of scholarship sports. Just establish minor leagues. If an athlete wants a college education they attend classes in their free time and pay tuition like everone else.

 

[sufandu]

I don't understand the position that you can only regulate if you deny compensation to anyone. Can't you allow players to profit from their own image or get some form of compensation, (at least a cost of living stipend and insurance against injuries) and regulate it in such a way that it won't be only the richest schools that get the best players, (which happens under the current system anyway)? It seems to me you can set rates for cost of living stipends and insist that salaries be commensurate with what a non-athlete would get for the same job. As far as endorsements, I would think that athletes might get better deals at a school where they can be the star than at schools where a 4 star recruit is a walk-on.

The minute that a player can profit from his own image the schools with the richest and most obsessed donors will consistently pay athletes the most, and the gap won't bE close. If we think SU is behind the factories now, let an Alabama booster buy 10,000 jersies of a particular player(s) to ensure they are payed the most. You only have to look at how Alabama boosters raised money to pay off Saban's mortgage to begin to see how that would play out. Making him the highest payed head coach wasn't enough. How hard was it for SU to raise the funds for the IPF, and that was somewhere around $15-20 million (I don't feel like looking up the exact number). Tennessee just finished something like a $70 million upgrade a couple years ago, and I think they have more planned.

Part of the NCAA's impossible job is leveling the playing field to a certain extent. When players start profiting from their likeness that will go out the window more than it has already.

 

[SWC75]

The minute that a player can profit from his own image the schools with the richest and most obsessed donors will consistently pay athletes the most, and the gap won't bE close. If we think SU is behind the factories now, let an Alabama booster buy 10,000 jersies of a particular player(s) to ensure they are payed the most. You only have to look at how Alabama boosters raised money to pay off Saban's mortgage to begin to see how that would play out. Making him the highest payed head coach wasn't enough. How hard was it for SU to raise the funds for the IPF, and that was somewhere around $15-20 million (I don't feel like looking up the exact number). Tennessee just finished something like a $70 million upgrade a couple years ago, and I think they have more planned.

Part of the NCAA's impossible job is leveling the playing field to a certain extent. When players start profiting from their likeness that will go out the window more than it has already.

As I said, I don't see why the extent of their compensation can't be regulated, just like anything else. Why do you have to totally deny it to regulate it? You can have cost of living stipends but they should be at a set rate , adjusted for local conditions. You can have player get paid for jobs but it should be what any non-athlete would be paid in that market for the same job. And compensation for endorsements could be limited to a certain amount as well. You don't need to annihilate it to regulate it.

 

[sufandu]

As I said, I don't see why the extent of their compensation can't be regulated, just like anything else. Why do you have to totally deny it to regulate it? You can have cost of living stipends but they should be at a set rate , adjusted for local conditions. You can have player get paid for jobs but it should be what any non-athlete would be paid in that market for the same job. And compensation for endorsements could be limited to a certain amount as well. You don't need to annihilate it to regulate it.

The whole idea is that they get paid what they are worth on the open market. That doesn't allow for any real regulation. Since they already get stipends it would be what we have now with a substantial pay raise. People would still argue that player X be given a set percentage for anything with his likeness attached. If the percentage is set, the player with the most merchandise/endorsements/etc. makes the most. The factories (the boosters) would make sure everyone knew their players made more than the competition. If you connect stipends to cost of living, the most expensive areas NYC/LA/Chicago/large urban area would pay the most. Same problem different metric. The part about them working jobs for regular pay is barely a part of this discussion. The players are asking for a piece of the pie going to the NCAA and schools, not for permission to work part time jobs.

The only real answer is to end revenue college athletics. Turn them into pros like they want to be. Have clubs like they have in Europe and get rid of athletic scholarships.

 

[SWC75]

The whole idea is that they get paid what they are worth on the open market. That doesn't allow for any real regulation. Since they already get stipends it would be what we have now with a substantial pay raise. People would still argue that player X be given a set percentage for anything with his likeness attached. If the percentage is set, the player with the most merchandise/endorsements/etc. makes the most. The factories (the boosters) would make sure everyone knew their players made more than the competition. If you connect stipends to cost of living, the most expensive areas NYC/LA/Chicago/large urban area would pay the most. Same problem different metric. The part about them working jobs for regular pay is barely a part of this discussion. The players are asking for a piece of the pie going to the NCAA and schools, not for permission to work part time jobs.

The only real answer is to end revenue college athletics. Turn them into pros like they want to be. Have clubs like they have in Europe and get rid of athletic scholarships.

You can regulate anyone who wants to remain eligible.

 

[sufandu]

You can regulate anyone who wants to remain eligible.

You can try, and you'll have varying levels of success. Anytime someone thinks they deserve more than they're getting and someone else is willing to give it to them people will try to operate outside of the regulations. It happens now.

As long as you restrict how much someone can make from their own likeness someone will argue it is unfair.

What is hard to figure out, and this is somewhat of an aside, is how much of the worth comes from the individual versus the institution. How many of these athletes would have a marketable worth if they weren't connected to colleges with huge fan bases from alumni and regional fans? The only reason we care about Eric Dungey is because he is ours. Same with Lydon or Battle. Without the instant fans that the institutions provide, the only athletes with any "worth" would be the elite of the elite that could jump straight to the highest level of the pros. We only need to look at minor league baseball or hockey to see that.

 

[Ish88888]

Would help lower the ridiculous tuition at private schools. Two birds with one stone.

True, zero regs or radar on these schools. Its a travesty. I live in Schenectady, Union is 60k+. And many of these private schools are liberal arts schools where a BS doesn't get you anything in life. I love an education and did the private school thing at eckerd college in st. Pete...great place, great education...

 

[upperdeck]

tuition is crazy high. but go work the numbers and figure out how to make it lower? most employees make far less working at a college than they would in the real world, so where do you think the money goes?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

The minute that a player can profit from his own image the schools with the richest and most obsessed donors will consistently pay athletes the most, and the gap won't bE close. If we think SU is behind the factories now, let an Alabama booster buy 10,000 jersies of a particular player(s) to ensure they are payed the most. You only have to look at how Alabama boosters raised money to pay off Saban's mortgage to begin to see how that would play out. Making him the highest payed head coach wasn't enough. How hard was it for SU to raise the funds for the IPF, and that was somewhere around $15-20 million (I don't feel like looking up the exact number). Tennessee just finished something like a $70 million upgrade a couple years ago, and I think they have more planned.

Part of the NCAA's impossible job is leveling the playing field to a certain extent. When players start profiting from their likeness that will go out the window more than it has already.

That's all for the better.

 

[UnknownOrange]

Some thoughts...

1. If student-athletes were given a salary - wouldn't more kids opt to go to schools in states with no income tax? Would there be an adjustment made for that?

2. If there were no salaries but they could make $$ of their name/likeness/endorsements.. is there a cap on that? What stops Phil Knight from giving the top athletes in the country $1,000,000 for their autograph?

3. Do you pay athletes based on the money they make the Universities? Syracuse gets great numbers for MSOC but doesn't charge a ticket fee and obviously that helps and hurts them. Would they charge for the games if that meant they aren't losing money for the university just so they could pay their players?

4. If you pay the players in whichever form, you need to eliminate the transfer rule too. Also very dangerous game there.

5. If you find a way to pay players - make it a minimum based on their GPA. I know it is insanely tough to balance school and a D1 sport but there needs to be a GPA requirement.

 

[Hoo's That]

Some thoughts...

... {snip} ...
5. If you find a way to pay players - make it a minimum based on their GPA. I know it is insanely tough to balance school and a D1 sport but there needs to be a GPA requirement.

All of this pay system is, I believe, built around the Jay Bilas proposal that athletes don't have to go to class, so most won't have a GPA. No one in the SEC will have a GPA. (If the pay system happens, Vandy leaves the SEC.)

 

[UnknownOrange]

All of this pay system is, I believe, built around the Jay Bilas proposal that athletes don't have to go to class, so most won't have a GPA. No one in the SEC will have a GPA. (If the pay system happens, Vandy leaves the SEC.)

So to that point .. what happens if a player has a career ending injury? If he's not a student then he cannot get a degree from that school as he wasn't accepted into a school within the college. He would need to go to a college he could get into and get a degree that way, right?

Crazy thing is - I want them to be paid. It's just going to take a big effort