Interesting NCAA Column in NYT

[triplethrea]

They have every opportunity to get paid what they are worth today. It's called playing professionally. The NCAA nor any college is keeping an athlete from getting paid what they are worth today.

During their college years they cannot receive even a penny from playing basketball. They can only make money once they graduate or leave school.

You are not getting my point at all. When an athlete plays at a program like Syracuse, they are making the university millions of dollars. Yet, due to NCAA rules they cannot make a penny off the profit they are helping the university make. Do you see the problem here? Everybody is making money. Coaches are getting paid $1 million+, athletic directors, shoe deals, merchandise sales, etc. and the players need to shut up and be happy with their scholarship despite deserving so much more? Get out of here.

Name another organization that can get away with not paying it's employees? Name another organization that pulls in hundreds of millions of dollars and punishes it's employees for trying to profit? The NCAA is a sham.

 

[rrlbees]

If the highest bidder offers a $2000 stipend then fine. If a school offers a $1 million stipend then that is fine too.

Yea, that will work great. Who has the richest donors?

 

[OrangeAl]

As a thread summary, there is no solution to this problem because:

• Big-time college football and men's basketball are businesses that use athletes as pawns.

• These businesses used to exclude black athletes but now are egalitarian.

• But since black athletes are now allowed to be pawns of the business their over-participation is seen as racism.

• Title IX says colleges can't give stipends unless they include all the non-revenue (e.g.women's) teams.

• If they pay players based on individual market value they'll be opening a can of worms (or maybe Pandora's box).

• The athletes do receive free education, room and board, but that's not what people want them to receive.

• Some college sports fans would not follow minor league football and basketball if they didn't involve colleges.

 

[rrlbees]

• Big-time college football and men's basketball are businesses that use athletes as pawns.

Pawns usually don't get anything. Athletes do in a big way.

• The athletes do receive free education, room and board, but that's not what people want them to receive.

And besides the $100 - $200K they also get on average $1M in future earnings and even more if they realize their professional sports aspirations.

 

[SaintTristan]

Yet, due to NCAA rules they cannot make a penny off the profit they are helping the university make. Do you see the problem here? Everybody is making money.

simply not true. every hoops player is receiving benefits each yr with a $ value equal to tens of thousands of dollars. They volunteered to be paid in kind. no one is forcing them to do it.

 

[rrlbees]

simply not true. every hoops player is receiving benefits each yr with a $ value equal to tens of thousands of dollars. They volunteered to be paid in kind. no one is forcing them to do it.

call guiness, we agree and i've been saying the same thing.

happy new year.

 

[SaintTristan]

call guiness, we agree and i've been saying the same thing.

happy new year.

You too!

 

[All4SU]

• Big-time college football and men's basketball are businesses that use athletes as pawns.

Pawns usually don't get anything. Athletes do in a big way.

• The athletes do receive free education, room and board, but that's not what people want them to receive.

And besides the $100 - $200K they also get on average $1M in future earnings and even more if they realize their professional sports aspirations.

As well as coaching to prepare them for the NBA, NFL if that is their desire, exposure -- guys like GMAC became household names based on playing at SU -- that is something they granted him through years of building their brand.

 

[All4SU]

You are not getting my point at all.

I can't speak for Bees. But I get your point. I just think you're wrong.

 

[pfister1]

Yea, that will work great. Who has the richest donors?

Exactly that would be a quick return to the days where a half dozen schools dominated sports and everyone else was on the outside looking in. We would be one of those programs on the outside looking in just judging by our Athletic Department's historical success raising money....its typically been a struggle. Whereas the Oklahoma States of the World with their T-Boone Pickens and Oregons with Phil Knight will rise to the head of the class.

 

[rrlbees]

Exactly that would be a quick return to the days where a half dozen schools dominated sports and everyone else was on the outside looking in. We would be one of those programs on the outside looking in just judging by our Athletic Department's historical success raising money....its typically been a struggle. Whereas the Oklahoma States of the World with their T-Boone Pickens and Oregons with Phil Knight will rise to the head of the class.

Since only 14 BCS schools made a profit in their athletic department last report I saw, yes, boosters would determine who went where and for how much.

 

[All4SU]

Since only 14 BCS schools made a profit in their athletic department last report I saw, yes, boosters would determine who went where and for how much.

Boosters, and further cuts to non-revenue sports. Soon, there would be nothing but basketball and football.

 

[MikeSU02]

I'm just not getting your point at all. You do NOT have to go to college to play in the NBA or NFL. Any age restrictions the NBA or NFL put in is their rule, not the NCAA's. You seem to want pay for play vs giving college athletes a stipend. Fine, you like the baseball model. So go talk to the NBA and NFL about setting up a minor league where more kids would get paid to play for pay sooner. It's not the NCAA that would set up a professional minor league system for those 2 sports.

BTW, I just checked and the difference in lifetime earnings between a kid with a HS degree and a 4 year college degree is about $1M. So you can add that to your value of a college education. And yes, I know some athletes would go to college even without the scholarship, but many wouldn't or couldn't.

The NCAA is acting, imo, as a monopsony. It does not want a minor league system to compete with it as a sole buyer in a marker (or just about). I know you say that kids don't have to play for the NCAA technically, but in real terms, if you want the best chance to showcase your talents for the NBA as an American-born AAU/HS player, you want to go to the NCAA. I think we can all admit that. The NCAA rout also helps set up their image and makes them a known commodity. You get to be on national TV. You are on SportsCenter.

And here is the thing about the value of a player to a school, there is a very easy way to solve this, strip out the regulations and see what an Anthony Davis is worth to UK. If the $50K or so he gets for tuition and everything else per year is enough, he will earn that much.

Granted, this is an oversimplified example, but you know and I know that a lot of these kids are worth way more than the $50K.

If it were up to me, I would set up a trust for kids that play in revenue-producing sports that would pay out in some manner over the course of their lifetimes, on money that each kid helped the university earn. The yearly stipends should also be increased.

 

[rrlbees]

And here is the thing about the value of a player to a school, there is a very easy way to solve this, strip out the regulations and see what an Anthony Davis is worth to UK. If the $50K or so he gets for tuition and everything else per year is enough, he will earn that much.

See all my other comments. Free market for athletes won't work and would only be a show of which boosters will pay the most. Very few schools make money in athletics. You also left out the real value of an education which isn't $50K/yr. It's a million or more.

 

[MikeSU02]

See all my other comments. Free market for athletes won't work and would only be a show of which boosters will pay the most. Very few schools make money in athletics. You also left out the real value of an education which isn't $50K/yr. It's a million or more.

I'm not saying to do a fully free-market, I'm saying it's a way to prove what I am saying. Also, the actual pay versus the worth of an experience is totally different.

My current job experience is going to pay off in the future, but my current salary does not reflect that.

Again, I would set up a trust.

 

[All4SU]

Where is the NBA player's Union in all of this? Or the NFL player's union? Wouldn't it be in the best interests of their constituents (and potential constituents) to lobby for minor leagues to support both of those leagues?

People get all riled up and want to blame the NCAA and the universities. I think the outrage is somewhat misplaced. Go hard after the NFL, the NBA, and those unions. Push the NCAA and the Universities to keep their focus on education and amateur athletics. Make it easier for kids who don't want an education, but want to try their hand at professional sports to do so, without feeling like they're being "used." Increase the perceived value of the education, and encourage kids to use their athletic skills to get that education to improve their quality of life -- not to make a few dimes playing basketball for a couple of years.

Sure, this may sound a little naive and utopian, but if you're going to fix a problem, do it right. Don't just do a quick patch and ultimately compound other existing problems.

 

[ClamOtto]

I'm not sure I want schools bidding to pay the highest salaries for most of the reasons pointed out above. To me, though, the biggest hypocrisy is that "student athletes" are in may ways treated worse than students who are not athletes. It's not that uncommon for students (particularly grad students) to receive free tuition and a stipend (sometimes $20K or more) while they're in school, either in return for work or sometimes just as a fellowship. And there are generally no restrictions on students earning even more from outside jobs that use the skills they are gaining in school. So why are athletes prohibited from profiting in any way from their own fame and skills? If someone wants to sell their jersey or get paid for autographs they should have that right. This would allow athletes to help support themselves while keeping the schools out of a bidding war.

I'm not naive - I realize the danger is that it provides a loophole for backdoor booster payments. But I'm also not naive enough to believe these payments don't happen already. At least it would bring it would shine some light on it and would treat athletes the same as other students.

 

[SaintTristan]

If the free market idea takes hold SU might as well wind down its sports programs because there is no way SU competes with other BCS programs for athletes.

 

[baggerbob]

For all the people talking about paying the football and basketball players this a senseless argument. When the U S government passed Title 9 they eliminated any opportunity to pay players. Womens groups would demand the government to file a lawsuit claiming discrimination if women were not treated equally.

 

[triplethrea]

For all the people talking about paying the football and basketball players this a senseless argument. When the U S government passed Title 9 they eliminated any opportunity to pay players. Womens groups would demand the government to file a lawsuit claiming discrimination if women were not treated equally.

This is debunked here. In fact most of the arguments are debunked on that website.

In regards to concerns of teams not being able to compete with payments allowed, I propose these quotes:

There are two problems with this argument. The first is that it assumes that currently the “Have Not” schools somehow grab an equal share of talent. They do not. “Haves” recruit great players and consistently win. Have-Nots get the leftovers and occasionally luck into hidden gems who gel as seniors and win.

On the other hand, if George Mason wants to win a recruiting war with Duke, it’s probably doomed under the current system. Letting Have-Nots use cash is actually the best way to overcome the current unlevel playing field. If we allowed schools to choose how much to offer a player, a current “Have Not” college could use money to steal a player or two from the “Haves” and help begin the climb to the ranks of the elite. If the alumni of ETSU want to fund a powerhouse basketball program, currently they have no dimension on which they can outshine Kentucky. But if they could offer Kentucky recruits $50,000 a year to come to ETSU, they might start winning those recruiting battles frequently enough to become more, not less, competitive with Kentucky.

I also have to add that the "scholarship is worth $1 million" is nonsense. If you want to play that game, at least start by getting the lifetime income of those with high school degrees and then subtract it from your "$1 million over 40 years". Then factor in the very realistic chance the students never receive a job in the major they choose.

I'm sorry a scholarship is great but your putting it on a pedestal to push your point. These students are worth a lot more than a scholarship to these schools. I don't buy the argument that these schools are some sort of philanthropists giving back to the kids. I think they are just paying the students with the only income they are allowed to use.

 

[Col. Bleep]

The simple free market proposals would seem to make college sports just another professional league of sorts.
Perhaps the answer is to let colleges be colleges and continue to offer free educations for players who genuinely qualify.
In combination with that, there can be minor leagues used to groom talent for the big time.
No more age limits.
No restrictions on what players could be paid.

I might couple this with a kind of "STOCK MARKET" in which players could sell "FUTURES" in themselves.

Players could go as far as their skills will take them.

Plenty of flaws here...but there are plenty of flaws in the current system.
Not the least of which is that the people who generate huge college revenues get no pay.

 

[gocraz4dasu]

It doesn't matter. The NCAA is about as corrupt as it could possibly be. All the schools illegally recruit anyways. Go on campus to all the big schools and look out for the really nice cars and quite a few are the athletes at the school. The great players don't go to class and have papers written for them. The situation is completely out of control and nobody seems to be doing anything to get it under control so you might as well accept it. Boosters and schools will buy recruits/players anything they want as long as they produce. Julio Jones's mom drove a brand new white cadillac cts with a specialized license plate with something like juliosmom (too long, I know but you get the point) and I'm pretty sure she was on welfare for most of Julio's childhood. Sammy Watkins at Clemson drives a car $80,000+ with 24 inch rims, according to my friend who goes there. I'm sure it was the money he saved up over the summer though. I've had multiple people from Virginia Tech's athletic department say Michael Vick didn't go to a single class during his time at Tech.

It's just how college football is now-a-days and it's not going to change as long as it makes that ridiculous sums of cash. The NCAA knows it, they just come down when somebody is going to break a story about a school so they give out a punishment to make it look like they are still a wholesome organization that is "looking out" for the players. Once something leaks to the press and everyone hears about it, the NCAA finally steps in. They don't actually care as long as they are bathing in the money they get from exploiting student athletes. It's a joke but it's not going to change unless something monumental happens, which I doubt anytime soon.

 

[triplethrea]

Exactly. Everything is already corrupt. Paying players is the next logical step. Give the kids what they deserve, they've worked as hard for it as everybody else getting paid. It's time the empty suits stop hiding behind "ideals and moral" to line their pockets with money that belongs to people they are not paying.

The only viewpoint behind this minor league system idea seems to be "maintaining the purity" of college athletics or whatever BS. I know that you know that I know that you know that is a fairy tale. The pie is big. Nobody wants to break up that pie. Not the NCAA, not the schools, not the NBA. Nobody wants a minor league system to take money, talent, and fans away from college sports. They will pay the players eventually. Everything begins with the O'Bannon lawsuit.

The NCAA is clinging to the "student athlete". They know that as soon as they split money with the players, they will have to lower their salaries and sell one of their many houses. That's what this is all about. Not the "purity" of the game.

 

[pfister1]

Exactly. Everything is already corrupt. Paying players is the next logical step. Give the kids what they deserve, they've worked as hard for it as everybody else getting paid. It's time the empty suits stop hiding behind "ideals and moral" to line their pockets with money that belongs to people they are not paying.

The only viewpoint behind this minor league system idea seems to be "maintaining the purity" of college athletics or whatever BS. I know that you know that I know that you know that is a fairy tale. The pie is big. Nobody wants to break up that pie. Not the NCAA, not the schools, not the NBA. Nobody wants a minor league system to take money, talent, and fans away from college sports. They will pay the players eventually. Everything begins with the O'Bannon lawsuit.

The NCAA is clinging to the "student athlete". They know that as soon as they split money with the players, they will have to lower their salaries and sell one of their many houses. That's what this is all about. Not the "purity" of the game.

The NCAA should not be in the business of running a professional sports league. Unfortunately, I think that if changes are going to be made along those lines that it probably means dismantle some of the current system. If you are going to allow the NCAA to pay players some number that represents the revenue they are generating why hold firm to the requirement that players attend classes.

To me, once you pay them significant sums, you have given in to the idea that they are there only for basketball (football or whatever sport it is that they are playing). If their future is in playing that sport then they should train 24/7 - do away with the silly restrictions on number of games, length of season, hours of practice etc., etc. Might also just as well do away with the requirement that the athletes make progress towards a degree. If you are a fill-in player you can take classes towards degree, but maybe you would not be required to do so.

If you are Anthony Davis going to Kentucky for a year to bide your time before you become eligible for a huge payday, why do you want to divert your attention from preparing for your future taking classes, worrying about tests, projects or papers?

 

[Col. Bleep]

If players do get paid...we should call college athletics what it explicity would be: professional sports.
It isn't far from that now...except the players get no pay for play...while NCAA reaps $800 mil. a year.

Meanwhile the full NYT Magazine article is even more interesting.
The author has a 5-point plan that supposedly could make this work.
The flaws might make for an even longer piece.
But that's part of what makes the topic interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/m...ing-college-athletes.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all