Well, this is interesting

[cuseguy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/s...l?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid==tw-nytsports&_r=0

 

[TheCusian]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/s...l?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid==tw-nytsports&_r=0

Interesting. The ND loophole is problematic to them joining the ACC fully. It also allows UCONN, Cinci, etc. some leeway to mitigate the recruiting fallout.

I'm not sure what it means to our bottom line...

 

[Toga]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/sports/n-c-a-a-s-rich-poised-to-get-richer-with-more-athlete-benefits-.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid==tw-nytsports&_r=0

Whoomp there it is. Hey guys - don't forget to blow up conference division crap while you're at it.

 

[rocklloyd]

If they get paid, they have to pay taxes as well, right?

 

[texascpa]

If they get paid, they have to pay taxes as well, right?

Most likely, yes.

 

[Full_Rebar]

This might not pass because the non P5 schools would be putting themselves at a huge competitive disadvantage. It seems like a number of schools have the notion that they can still get into the Playoff, while others are rightfully worried about competing for national titles in other sports. If the P5 get to make their own rules, it becomes much harder for those schools to do so.

On the other hand, the P5 are wisely playing the D4 card. The threat of them breaking completely and taking the biggest $ could also kill a number of programs. It will be interesting to see how the vote turns out.

 

[Upstate]

I just don't see how you can regulate pay for players correctly and fairly. $1 or $100,000, as soon as money is allowed to change hands, it's just seems like no one will follow the rules.

 

[CuseOnly]

Most likely, yes.

Would they have to pay taxes on something that is technically a stipend? All they are talking about paying them is the FCA, not any type of salary. Which is only a few thousand dollars a year more than what they get now.

 

[Moontan]

I just don't see how you can regulate pay for players correctly and fairly.

It's not "pay", it's a stipend to address common costs not covered by the current scholarship model.

It's unclear how far this will go. Ideally, I'd like to see it in place for all scholarship athletes in all sports.

 

[SUinNYC]

I just don't see how you can regulate pay for players correctly and fairly. $1 or $100,000, as soon as money is allowed to change hands, it's just seems like no one will follow the rules.

They can't regulate it correctly now and many players are already getting paid under the table. At least this would be above the board.

 

[TheCusian]

I think the primary question for us is: Is this good for the SEC and large powerhouses at the expense of smaller private schools? Will the gap widen, even though we're a p5 school?

 

[orange79]

Would they have to pay taxes on something that is technically a stipend? All they are talking about paying them is the FCA, not any type of salary. Which is only a few thousand dollars a year more than what they get now.

When I was a TA at SU, I had to pay tax on my stipend. I would assume, if it will be considered a stipend, the student athletes would be required to pay tax also. Of course, I am sure there will be some way around that.

 

[MaxwellCuse]

When I was a TA at SU, I had to pay tax on my stipend. I would assume, if it will be considered a stipend, the student athletes would be required to pay tax also. Of course, I am sure there will be some way around that.

When I was a TA at SU, I had to pay tax on my stipend. I would assume, if it will be considered a stipend, the student athletes would be required to pay tax also. Of course, I am sure there will be some way around that.

My daughter has to pay tax on the stipend she gets as a grad student at Notre Dame. I would say it is almost certain that the student-athletes will have to pay tax...that is, IF they earn enough from the stipend + other income sources to have to pay taxes.

 

[Full_Rebar]

This doesn't have to be complicated. Allow a standard cost of attendance stipend (which is calculated by each school already for full scholarship students), and set up a NCAA standard likeness contract. You let every athlete regardless of sport sign to get a percentage of sales of clothing, trading cards, calendars, etc, which features their image. You determine an amount for any video game company to pay the players in their game ( I believe EA Sports said they would have paid $400-700 per player featured). This money goes to a fund, which is accessible when the student graduates (or leaves school academically eligible by the institution's standards).

Yes, the star fb/hoops player is going to get more than a swimmer or field hockey player, but the top athletes in those sports will be able to benefit. I'm sure UConn sells plenty of Brianna Stewart jerseys

 

[SU2NASA]

It's not "pay", it's a stipend to address common costs not covered by the current scholarship model.

It's unclear how far this will go. Ideally, I'd like to see it in place for all scholarship athletes in all sports.

How about people on academic scholarships? What about their costs not covered by the current scholarship model?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

This doesn't have to be complicated. Allow a standard cost of attendance stipend (which is calculated by each school already for full scholarship students), and set up a NCAA standard likeness contract. You let every athlete regardless of sport sign to get a percentage of sales of clothing, trading cards, calendars, etc, which features their image. You determine an amount for any video game company to pay the players in their game ( I believe EA Sports said they would have paid $400-700 per player featured). This money goes to a fund, which is accessible when the student graduates (or leaves school academically eligible by the institution's standards).

Yes, the star fb/hoops player is going to get more than a swimmer or field hockey player, but the top athletes in those sports will be able to benefit. I'm sure UConn sells plenty of Brianna Stewart jerseys

That's not a bad idea. I think if the money is going directly from the schools to the athletes you run in to all kinds of problems long term so you want the $ coming from outside of the school, but a kind of hybrid model like you described could work I think.

 

[Full_Rebar]

How about people on academic scholarships? What about their costs not covered by the current scholarship model?

Students on full academic scholarships are already receiving the full cost of attendance.

 

[texascpa]

Would they have to pay taxes on something that is technically a stipend? All they are talking about paying them is the FCA, not any type of salary. Which is only a few thousand dollars a year more than what they get now.

A stipend is not always not taxable. In fact, many times it is. The key is not whether they use the stipend for school expenditures (yes, that is a factor, but not the main key) but rather if they are providing services in return for the stipend. It can easily be argued that an athlete is performing services which directly benefit the school and without being an athlete they would not receive the stipend. That is a taxable event.

there are a few other factors that make the stipend taxable as well, such as, working directly under the supervision of the grantor (the athletic department would most likely be the grantor and athletes are under the direct supervision of the athletic department), and grantor requires you to perform for the direct benefit of the grantor.

 

[SU2NASA]

Students on full academic scholarships are already receiving the full cost of attendance.

I've always believed that if they want to be paid, cut them a check for the full tuition and room and board and let them do with it what they like. They can choose to spend it on attending the university or take he cash and spend it.

For SU that would be what for all of their benefits, over $75K?

Also, the vast majority of academic scholarships don't cover anything above tuition and room and board. "Full cost of attendance" as you're using it, is extremely rare for academics.

 

[Full_Rebar]

Also, the vast majority of academic scholarships don't cover anything above tuition and room and board. "Full cost of attendance" as you're using it, is extremely rare for academics.

Actually any student who is not an athlete is able to receive financial aid up to and including cost of attendance. I can't answer to how prevalent it's used on many campuses, but the fact is that students can use scholarships, grants, loans, FWS, etc. up to that amount where athletes are not allowed.

I understand that many academic scholarships, like athletic scholarships, are partial, but lifting the cap would be an easy place to start.

 

[billsin01]

I've always believed that if they want to be paid, cut them a check for the full tuition and room and board and let them do with it what they like. They can choose to spend it on attending the university or take he cash and spend it.

I'm completely on board with this idea.

 

[SWC75]

Students on full academic scholarships are already receiving the full cost of attendance.

That's what I think is really needed, not "salaries", which might be greater at one school than another. Just give athletes the full scholarships anybody else gets so they won't have to trade trinkets for tattoos, etc. And I see no problem with them making endorsement deals, as other "amateur" athletes do. There could be a rule set limiting those endorsements to whatever their market value is so phony endorsement deals wouldn't be used as recruiting incentives.

 

[SU2NASA]

Actually any student who is not an athlete is able to receive financial aid up to and including cost of attendance. I can't answer to how prevalent it's used on many campuses, but the fact is that students can use scholarships, grants, loans, FWS, etc. up to that amount where athletes are not allowed.

I understand that many academic scholarships, like athletic scholarships, are partial, but lifting the cap would be an easy place to start.

As I said, those types of scholarships are very rare. I believe a majority of academic scholarships don't even include room and board but only handle all or part of tuition and fees.

What athletes receive is also not counting the academic resources, tutoring, meal plans, etc. that non-athletes do not receive.

Give them a check for the cost to the university and let them blow it if they want.

The fact of the matter is, for 99% of student athletes who will never play professionally, the value of their degree is significantly higher than the cost of their scholarship. If they believe they're getting a raw deal, screw 'em.

 

[rmtsu]

Actually any student who is not an athlete is able to receive financial aid up to and including cost of attendance. I can't answer to how prevalent it's used on many campuses, but the fact is that students can use scholarships, grants, loans, FWS, etc. up to that amount where athletes are not allowed.

I understand that many academic scholarships, like athletic scholarships, are partial, but lifting the cap would be an easy place to start.

There is very little comparison for a Full Athletic Scholarship to the average student. There are very few Full Academic Scholarships at colleges and many of them are Tuition only, or they are sponsored by an outside group or specific endowment. For example the top academic award for Newhouse is 12k (granted there are over 4000 applicants vying for 350 spots but a choice has to be made by many of the students to take on crushing debt to go to Newhouse), some of the other SU colleges have higher awards because of lower numbers of applicants, but the bottom line is there is little comparison to a Full Athletic Scholarship player at private university to the amount of cost for all but a few students. Most middle/upper middle income students can't afford to go to a school like SU even if they did well in high school unless they are willing to take on a large amount of debt. Unless your family has the ability to write a large check every year (30-40k) after academic awards and maybe a little need based aid SU is out of reach for the families who aren't necesarily poor but aren't extremely wealthy, I have little sympathy for players who have the ability to walk out of SU after 4-5 years with little to no debt and a degree if they worked on their academics. Especially when there are plenty of family's struggling to pay for college.

Yes players do put a lot of time into their sport, but most have academic support, time over the summers to take classes and possibly a 5th year to get their degree if they redshirted. A small stipend may not be out of the question, but very few athletic programs run in the black and even those that do get subsidies from the school to maintain their athletic programs. Sure there are a few Football and basketball programs that generate a lot of revenue, but there are many that don't. Some of the power house programs generate plenty of merchandising revenue, but many don't.

From most of the players that I've know over the years at different schools (Full Scholarship), the school costs are covered, but its having some spending money in their pocket for going out. That may be a different issue and many students have that issue.

The area where things get a bit clouded are the non-full scholarship players, but they also have the chance to get need based aid and academic merit money, depending on how well they did in school. But again those sports are not revenue generating or at least self-sustaining financially.

 

[javadoc]

I've always believed that if they want to be paid, cut them a check for the full tuition and room and board and let them do with it what they like. They can choose to spend it on attending the university or take he cash and spend it.

For SU that would be what for all of their benefits, over $75K?

Also, the vast majority of academic scholarships don't cover anything above tuition and room and board. "Full cost of attendance" as you're using it, is extremely rare for academics.

An idea I have floated, albeit somewhat jokingly. But it would give the privates an advantage almost overnight.

And counterintuitively, it would give in-state kids an incentive to go to the big state factory in another state, to take advantage of the out-of-state tuition rates. Ohio kids flocking to Michigan!