Paying student athletes...what's the answer?

[Jasoncuse]

I wanted to add this to the big thread about the corruption in college hoops, but felt maybe it is worthy of a new discussion. If this belongs better in that thread, that's fine, please move it. Anyhow...

Does anybody have a logical solution to fairly paying athletes that doesn't completely destroy college athletics? This seems like such a convoluted mess with so many facets, that I'm not even sure what the answer is.

If you give every basketball player, say, $20K cash a year, you have to pay women's athletes the same, no? If you pay an entire football team, what about the soccer and field hockey teams? Won't there be Title IX issues?

If schools are to pay athletes in the prominent sports, how quickly will they get rid of pretty much every other sport they legally can, or at least get rid of the scholarships associated with them? Keep football and men's hoops, along with women's hoops and whatever other programs reach Title IX compliance, but won't you see schools dump the other men's teams? It won't be that drastic, necessarily, but for some schools trying to keep up, maybe it will be.

If you allow kids to profit off their image, where does that end? I think this is where kids should get paid, at least something, but I think it would get sticky pretty quickly. You'll have Kentucky boosters giving kids $250K for signing a jersey (assuming that isn't happening already, which I'm sure it probably is). You'll quickly get a division between the haves and have nots. Big state schools with a deep pool of boosters will always have a significant advantage in this. Maybe that's fair, maybe it's not. But will you see programs like Butler, Wichita St, Uconn, St Mary's, etc keep up in any way?

Maybe allow kids to profit off their likeness, but the money goes into a trust? Maybe they have to graduate to get the full amount? I don't know what the solution is because I think this will lead to huge problems for schools that aren't big money makers. Syracuse basketball should be fine, but what about football?

Academic bonuses?

Higher pay outs for upperclassmen?

Will boosters or the schools not pay a kid to push him out and force a transfer?

Pay kids out based on NCAA Tourney results or bowl wins?

I'm curious what other people see as the solution...

 

[cuse10]

College athletics is already destroyed. The current system is a sham and the revenue generating sports serve as farm systems for the NFL, NBA, MLB and to a lesser extent the NHL.

Simply follow the Olympic model. It is not a difficult concept. That way, you see who truly has value in an open, free market and you eliminate many of the issues of "equal pay".

As far as other schools not being able to keep up, that's not a big programs problem. There have always been the have's and have not's and that will never change. The top athletes will still go to Alabama and Duke.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

There is no solution. Any system in which the players are paid below market value (what they can get from some agent on the street) is going to result in illegal monetary flow. Even if you paid everyone 20k...guys will seek to get another 80 or who knows how much...

 

[SUOrangeSU]

Saw on another forum that someone said build it out where every men's basketball team has a cap..100k and the coaches offer what they can to the incoming student. Spreads the recruits around more (no more of this one single team getting 3 top 5 players). Idk, seemed pretty good?

 

[EastCoast2]

I see a lot of people saying "just let the players profit off their likeness". This is extremely complicated and would effectively turn college sports into the minor leagues. If you allow a football player to profit off his brand, every top 300 player would go to the top 10 schools (including Bama, UGA, UND, USC, Miami, OSU, PSU, OU, Texas, Auburn, etc). Why? Schools with more alumni, more sponsors, more focus on the sport will run away with the competition. Every Bama booster in the southeast who owns a car dealership will "hire" the Bama players to do commercials, give speeches, training camps, autograph sessions, etc. Do you think Syracuse or TCU can compete with that? I don't think Mark Few and Gonzaga can offer 25% of the earning potential as UK/Duke/UNC. It would turn into a jungle of "no-show jobs" and boosters now legally giving players stacks of cash. College sports would quickly turn into one single power league of 10-15 schools, Syracuse not included.

 

[Sherman20]

There is no solution. Any system in which the players are paid below market value (what they can get from some agent on the street) is going to result in illegal monetary flow. Even if you paid everyone 20k...guys will seek to get another 80 or who knows how much...

Not entirely true. Pro sports have salary caps and other restrictions and you don’t see franchises paying atheletes and their agents extra hush money under the table. I think payment of some kind, maybe a share of NCAA tourney, and getting rid of 1 and done would lessen a lot of this underground market, even if it doesn’t eliminate it entirely.

 

[LGO85]

It will only cost the schools more money and will not stop agents wanting to hire new talent.

 

[djcon57]

"This will turn into the have and have nots and we can't have that" - Signed, Syracuse fans that have been making fun of UConn for ending up in an irrelevant conference for years.

There already is haves and have nots. This is ridiculous

 

[orangenirvana]

If you give every basketball player, say, $20K cash a year, you have to pay women's athletes the same, no?

No. Why would you?

If schools are to pay athletes in the prominent sports, how quickly will they get rid of pretty much every other sport they legally can, or at least get rid of the scholarships associated with them? Keep football and men's hoops, along with women's hoops and whatever other programs reach Title IX compliance, but won't you see schools dump the other men's teams? It won't be that drastic, necessarily, but for some schools trying to keep up, maybe it will be.

If you need to, put a rule in place that says they can't dump the other sports. If some schools can't keep up, then so be it. (They'll be fine).

If they can "keep up" today then I don't see why they can't "keep up" when players can be paid. Some schools won't be able to afford to pay their players any more than they're already allowed to. But, so what? That won't stop those programs from existing.

If you allow kids to profit off their image, where does that end? I think this is where kids should get paid, at least something, but I think it would get sticky pretty quickly. You'll have Kentucky boosters giving kids $250K for signing a jersey (assuming that isn't happening already, which I'm sure it probably is).

Again I ask...so what? If that's how an individual wants to spend his/her money, what's the harm? As long as the money flows out in the open through the university, I don't see what the problem is.

Instead of all those millions (billions?) of dollars going into these ridiculous and completely unnecessary palaces they call "facilities", that money can actually go to the players directly.

 

[orangenirvana]

I see a lot of people saying "just let the players profit off their likeness". This is extremely complicated and would effectively turn college sports into the minor leagues. If you allow a football player to profit off his brand, every top 300 player would go to the top 10 schools (including Bama, UGA, UND, USC, Miami, OSU, PSU, OU, Texas, Auburn, etc). Why? Schools with more alumni, more sponsors, more focus on the sport will run away with the competition. Every Bama booster in the southeast who owns a car dealership will "hire" the Bama players to do commercials, give speeches, training camps, autograph sessions, etc. Do you think Syracuse or TCU can compete with that? I don't think Mark Few and Gonzaga can offer 25% of the earning potential as UK/Duke/UNC. It would turn into a jungle of "no-show jobs" and boosters now legally giving players stacks of cash. College sports would quickly turn into one single power league of 10-15 schools, Syracuse not included.

I have news for you: THAT ALREADY HAPPENS.

Folks - there is no recruiting parity today. The best players go to the powerhouses. If Syracuse or TCU can compete today, then that won't change when the players can legally profit.

"This will turn into the have and have nots and we can't have that" - Signed, Syracuse fans that have been making fun of UConn for ending up in an irrelevant conference for years.

There already is haves and have nots. This is ridiculous

EXACTLY

 

[cuseincincy]

Don't. Keep it the way it is. Suspend or kick out people that break the rules (or maybe a simplified version of the rules). Let the kids work in their off season. If the education and off season part time job is not enough because of someone's financial situation then let them attempt to find someone to pay them to play their sport some where else. Could be some good life lessons about how life is not always fair and competition is not about a participation trophy.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I’m with Boeheim on this. The free education and whatever the current extras now should be enough. It varies from school to school and sport to sport. I was friends with a track/shot put guy at USC who also at one point was a backup C on the football team before he stopped and only did track. Lived across the hall from me in an off campus apt. We would game from time to time and I sometimes would go over to his place to watch Syracuse games because I didn’t have cable. I distinctly remember watching a SU @ LVille game at Freedom Hall at his place. I think it was a L. He was getting $350/mo he said and that was around 1999/2000. I know there were times when I was in college (grad school) and it was a struggle to eat and pay rent. A real struggle. USC had a sweet althletes only dining hall/restaurant I was always jealous of. The system is currently corrupt obviously and more could be done. Get the one and dones out for sure. There’s always going to be a few coaches, handlers, agents, kids/families, etc., who are going to cheat and make it look much worse than it actually is.

 

[Brooky03]

Let players profit from advertising and endorsements. That's where the money is. Have advertisers go through an NCAA approval process for each ad to safeguard against booster abuses. Give the player(s) in the ad a cut of the ad revenue. This gets players worthy of being paid, the money they should be allowed to earn. It carries the smallest chance of boosters improperly funneling large sums of money, aside from the NCAA just paying wages, and it can even the playing field for midmajors (Great players would get paid at small schools, like Steph Curry would have).

Or just have the NCAA pay players in the profitable sports (football and basketball).

 

[moqui]

If you give every basketball player, say, $20K cash a year, you have to pay women's athletes the same, no? If you pay an entire football team, what about the soccer and field hockey teams? Won't there be Title IX issues?
.

yes

and it wouldn't make a difference. anyone who is already willing to take a $100k illicit payment is not going to be dissuaded by a $20k stipend spread out over 9 months

 

[orangecuse]

"This will turn into the have and have nots and we can't have that" - Signed, Syracuse fans that have been making fun of UConn for ending up in an irrelevant conference for years.

There already is haves and have nots. This is ridiculous

No doubt! Is it really any different than the larger society/culture that encompasses it today?

 

[cuseincincy]

yes

and it wouldn't make a difference. anyone who is already willing to take a $100k illicit payment is not going to be dissuaded by a $20k stipend spread out over 9 months

Yep. You don't get a thief stealing thousands of dollars to stop stealing by offering them hundreds of dollars to stop.

 

[SoBeCuse]

I’m more interested in after college, frankly. I wish it could be similar to the music industry. Of course there would need to be some sort of Union involved. Some sort electronic media agreement. A small % of the profits made from video games sales, downloads, broadcasts, etc. Maybe paying a small amount/premium into a trust. Anything re-aired on ESPN like the 6OT game...E, Andy, Flynn and those guys should get something. A download/purchase of some NCAA video game.

Musicians get that. You can go to college, join the Union, and if you are lucky enough you can get hired on some of these projects. All these monster games like Destiny 2, Call of Duty, are symphonic scores. Most are done in Nashville now. Giant recording studios with full orchestra. Epic sound and scores. Bungie, Electronic Arts, etc. You get residual/royalty money. I have benefitted from this. The players deserve something.

Boeheim, BTW, gets a nice little check everytime Blue Chips or Hoop Dreams is aired. Those have been on a LOT lately too, ha.

 

[EastCoast2]

I have news for you: THAT ALREADY HAPPENS.

Folks - there is no recruiting parity today. The best players go to the powerhouses. If Syracuse or TCU can compete today, then that won't change when the players can legally profit.

EXACTLY

So your solution is to give the programs that already have a huge advantage, an ever greater advantage? Let's let all of Calipari's first round picks and NBA stars take recruits out to lunch, dinner, jet-skiing off Miami beach, then go to a few clubs? Do you think it would be fair for Calipari to bring the top-10 players in the country to Los Angeles for a weekend with Anthony Davis, John Wall, Karl-Anthony Towns, Devin Booker, DeMrcus Cousins, Eric Bledsoe? Then have all of those guys tweet @ the recruits and post pictures with them, just to build their "brand" and make themselves more valuable and marketable. This would very quickly become entirely about "how to I maximize my Instagram advertisement $" and nothing about "where should I play basketball where I can grow as an athlete and get an education."

 

[orangenirvana]

So your solution is to give the programs that already have a huge advantage, an ever greater advantage? Let's let all of Calipari's first round picks and NBA stars take recruits out to lunch, dinner, jet-skiing off Miami beach, then go to a few clubs? Do you think it would be fair for Calipari to bring the top-10 players in the country to Los Angeles for a weekend with Anthony Davis, John Wall, Karl-Anthony Towns, Devin Booker, DeMrcus Cousins, Eric Bledsoe? Then have all of those guys tweet @ the recruits and post pictures with them, just to build their "brand" and make themselves more valuable and marketable. This would very quickly become entirely about "how to I maximize my Instagram advertisement $" and nothing about "where should I play basketball where I can grow as an athlete and get an education."

It would be the same advantage at worst. Maybe if they put in some sort of a salary cap it would lessen that. But even if they didn't there would be no more added advantage or less parity between the haves and have-nots than we see today.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I see a lot of people saying "just let the players profit off their likeness". This is extremely complicated and would effectively turn college sports into the minor leagues. If you allow a football player to profit off his brand, every top 300 player would go to the top 10 schools (including Bama, UGA, UND, USC, Miami, OSU, PSU, OU, Texas, Auburn, etc). Why? Schools with more alumni, more sponsors, more focus on the sport will run away with the competition. Every Bama booster in the southeast who owns a car dealership will "hire" the Bama players to do commercials, give speeches, training camps, autograph sessions, etc. Do you think Syracuse or TCU can compete with that? I don't think Mark Few and Gonzaga can offer 25% of the earning potential as UK/Duke/UNC. It would turn into a jungle of "no-show jobs" and boosters now legally giving players stacks of cash. College sports would quickly turn into one single power league of 10-15 schools, Syracuse not included.

It already is a minor league.

The best players already go to a handful of places.

There is no guarantee talent would pool more at the top. In fact, I think it's more likely to spread out, because a) rich people don't like bad investments and paying a bunch of people to sit the bench is a bad investment and b) there is a very good chance that some players will benefit more from being the big fish in a small pond.

 

[djcon57]

So your solution is to give the programs that already have a huge advantage, an ever greater advantage? Let's let all of Calipari's first round picks and NBA stars take recruits out to lunch, dinner, jet-skiing off Miami beach, then go to a few clubs? Do you think it would be fair for Calipari to bring the top-10 players in the country to Los Angeles for a weekend with Anthony Davis, John Wall, Karl-Anthony Towns, Devin Booker, DeMrcus Cousins, Eric Bledsoe? Then have all of those guys tweet @ the recruits and post pictures with them, just to build their "brand" and make themselves more valuable and marketable. This would very quickly become entirely about "how to I maximize my Instagram advertisement $" and nothing about "where should I play basketball where I can grow as an athlete and get an education."

The solution would allow the players to be compensated without the schools paying a dime. I though that the big concern?

 

[TinyManInside]

There is no solution. Any system in which the players are paid below market value (what they can get from some agent on the street) is going to result in illegal monetary flow. Even if you paid everyone 20k...guys will seek to get another 80 or who knows how much...

100% this.

Players are bought and sold so that a university can get a competitive advantage.

Making sure every player gets paid does not alleviate the desire of school A to have better talent than school B.

This notion that players won't need to accept bribes and inducements because they are already paid is ludicrous and naive. I mean, let's say I make $250k a year at my job, and someone comes up to me and says "I know a way you can make another $100k for free, just doing what you're doing"... I doubt there are many people that would say "Nah, I'm good with what I'm already paid..."

 

[TinyManInside]

There’s always going to be a few coaches, handlers, agents, kids/families, etc., who are going to cheat and make it look much worse than it actually is.

In reality it's the other way around. It's actually much worse than it looks, even with all the FBI stuff coming out we've just scratched the tip of the iceberg. So far everything is tied to only one agency and one shoe company. We haven't even heard about Nike, Under Armor, tens of other agencies, and booster shenanigans. And the boosters might be the worst of all...

 

[SoBeCuse]

In reality it's the other way around. It's actually much worse than it looks, even with all the FBI stuff coming out we've just scratched the tip of the iceberg. So far everything is tied to only one agency and one shoe company. We haven't even heard about Nike, Under Armor, tens of other agencies, and booster shenanigans. And the boosters might be the worst of all...

Hey man I don’t have the answers. I generally think it is a very small percentage of recruits/boosters/agents/coaches involved. I don’t know.

 

[orangepassion]

This is only tangentially related, but I'd be fine with Basketball following the Baseball system. You can go straight to the NBA out of High School and make your money (If they want you) or stay for 3 years. No one is making anybody accept a scholarship-Anyone can go overseas (like the Balls) if college isn't for them. The NBA is a business-Except for the elite, they want guys who have developed and been coached.