Well, this is interesting

[SU2NASA]

It's not that what they are getting isn't valuable - it's just not reflective of the amount of generated by their participation. In other words- somebody's getting rich - it's just not them.

Let's pretend you work for a giant private company. Over your time there, they have signed the largest clients generating 10x the revenue. Now let's say your base salary stays the exact same, even though you were integral to landing the clients. When asking for a small raise, they tell you that you're not there to make money but to reap the non-material benefits, like education and "doing what you love"... Meanwhile your hunched over some research or a CPU all day and see a specialist about your back problems - does that all square with you as "ok?"

1) Who's getting rich at the universities? The coaches? So put a salary cap. Boom, no one's getting obscenely wealthy.

2) I go to another company. There are also plenty of places of work like that, such as non-profits.

 

[SU2NASA]

http://www.syracuse.com/orangefootball/index.ssf/2014/08/terrel_hunt_autonomy.html

Someone is in favor of getting more money? Shocking headline!

 

[TheCusian]

1) Who's getting rich at the universities? The coaches? So put a salary cap. Boom, no one's getting obscenely wealthy. 2) I go to another company. There are also plenty of places of work like that, such as non-profits.

1. Money is going everywhere but to the players.

2. In CFB there is no other company. And I don't think CFB players view what they do like working for a non-for-profit.

 

[SU2NASA]

1. Money is going everywhere but to the players.

2. In CFB there is no other company. And I don't think CFB players view what they do like working for a non-for-profit.

Can you tell me who is getting rich off of the players' backs at the universities?

There's an alternative, it's called don't play. No one's forcing them to carry that cross.

And universities are non-profits. Again, who at the university is getting rich? The Athletic Director and coaches? Anyone else?

 

[SU2NASA]

From the University of Michigan 2013 Annual Financial Report, sales and services by academic departments generated $125 million. And that doesn't count any grants that the university receives (add $1 billion to that number).

All this on the backs of the poor students that do the research. Meanwhile, everyone's getting rich off of them!

And that damn hospital is bringing in $2.6 billion while actually also collecting $94 million in fees from the doctors in residence there. The bastards!

Won't someone think of the children?

 

[TheCusian]

Can you tell me who is getting rich off of the players' backs at the universities? There's an alternative, it's called don't play. No one's forcing them to carry that cross. And universities are non-profits. Again, who at the university is getting rich? The Athletic Director and coaches? Anyone else?

Coaches, administrators, contractors, TV execs, crooked bowl executives, video game producers, etc. It's not just the schools that are making gobs of money from this arrangement. It's everyone but the players.

Wait - so they have this skill that they are very good at and uniquely qualified for and there's only one place to prep for your career - and they generate billions of dollars - but rather than be given any, they should just be happy and if they are not, they should sit out?

 

[TheCusian]

From the University of Michigan 2013 Annual Financial Report, sales and services by academic departments generated $125 million. And that doesn't count any grants that the university receives (add $1 billion to that number). All this on the backs of the poor students that do the research. Meanwhile, everyone's getting rich off of them! And that damn hospital is bringing in $2.6 billion while actually also collecting $94 million in fees from the doctors in residence there. The bastards! Won't someone think of the children?

Yep. That's kind of bullstuff too. You're making my point for me. Where is line? Some of it's gained in experience and education - but when you're talking billions? Is it right for any institution to make billions using to what amounts as cheap labor? Or, in the case you've just mentioned - where students are paying into the system that's taking advantage if them? C'mon.

 

[SWC75]

so who is going to set the market value? the school,NCAA or a bill rapp type dealership. local sponsors will be the ones to abuse market value like that Alabama clothing store that just so happens to have autogragh jerseys on the racks and photos of players holding still packaged clothing with the store's name in the background.

it's possible to determine the market value of anything, including endorsements. I don't even know what the second part of the sentence means in this context. If the players pose for the pictures and sign the garments, they should be compensated.

 

[Halo]

We can figure out the market value for all the rest of the employees at the university, and every other job in this country, but figuring out how to pay 100 football and basketball players causes all economic theory to collapse...weird. If boosters are willing to pay for a recruit, then it's because that recruit has value.

At the end of the day, there are roster size limits, so the talent still gets dispersed. We don't recruit against Alabama anyway and they already get the top kids. Teams still will pass on the Chandler and Art Jones' of the world because they already do that now.

The top schools already get the top kids. If anything, it might give some small privates with wealthy donors to gain an advantage like SMU back in the day. If you really want to make things fair, make the TV $'s equal among all the schools and limit the roster size to 75. Then a trickle down effect will happen when each school can't sign as many players as they currently do, leaving those 10 extra guys that normally would be with Bama, to have to go somewhere else.

 

[SU2NASA]

Yep. That's kind of bullstuff too. You're making my point for me. Where is line? Some of it's gained in experience and education - but when you're talking billions? Is it right for any institution to make billions using to what amounts as cheap labor? Or, in the case you've just mentioned - where students are paying into the system that's taking advantage if them? C'mon.

Your sarcasm meter is broken.

These are non-profit universities. I've done research that's brought revenue to the school. I have zero problem with it since that revenue helps to build and improve facilities and the experience I got was invaluable for my career. By continually improving facilities you can do more and more ambitious work which increases the educational opportunities, brings in more and more talent, and raises the stature of the school.

Athletic revenue does the same exact thing. Where do you think most of the this new revenue SU is bringing in because of the ACC is going? Things like the IPF, improvements to the Dome, locker rooms, football wing, etc. There are two people making salaries over a million in athletics. So outside of Shafer and Boeheim, who else at SU is getting so rich? Those are the people at SU supposedly getting rich off of the athletes. If you have a problem with that, then that's a debate over whether coaching salaries should be capped.

That revenue allows SU to provide better facilities and infrastructure for its teams, and attract even better athletes.

You can't consider anyone outside the university when discussing paying players. They're paying at the market rate, who it goes to is irrelevant to the debate. The question is, if you're going to pay players, what suffers? SU barely operates near the black. Do you cut non-revenue sports? Sacrifice in building and upgrading facilities?

I maintain, if student athletes think there situation is so shitty, then don't do it. No one's forcing you to. You're getting a free education, free housing, free meals, which is more than the vast majority of students, many of whom are actually contributing to a useful skill to the university's mission with the same time that any athlete puts in.

I've done it, I have zero sympathy for their supposed plight. If they want the money, give them what the cost to the university is and let them blow it how they want, but give them no access to academics. Boom, there's $75K per year. Do with it what you want and see what serves you better.

 

[Full_Rebar]

So if SU gives a full scholarship to a kid from Liberty City in Miami who has a child of their own. Tell me why SU shouldn't give him the full cost of attendance so when he gets one of his 3 weeks off from football that he might fly home to see his child, or be able to have them visit?

Should we say tough luck since only two head coaches make 7 figures or maybe should we take a little bit of bonus money away from the AD and Head Coaches who make well over 6 figures. Why should any Ath Dept employee receive a bonus for meeting APR or graduation rate benchmarks, or for winning a certain number of games? I'd be willing to bet that the bonus money received annually by people at SU could cover a 2k stipend for at 75 students.

Kudos to you for balancing your time and being successful, but don't assume everyone has the same options available to them.

 

[TheCusian]

Your sarcasm meter is broken.

These are non-profit universities. I've done research that's brought revenue to the school. I have zero problem with it since that revenue helps to build and improve facilities and the experience I got was invaluable for my career. By continually improving facilities you can do more and more ambitious work which increases the educational opportunities, brings in more and more talent, and raises the stature of the school.

Athletic revenue does the same exact thing. Where do you think most of the this new revenue SU is bringing in because of the ACC is going? Things like the IPF, improvements to the Dome, locker rooms, football wing, etc. There are two people making salaries over a million in athletics. So outside of Shafer and Boeheim, who else at SU is getting so rich? Those are the people at SU supposedly getting rich off of the athletes. If you have a problem with that, then that's a debate over whether coaching salaries should be capped.

That revenue allows SU to provide better facilities and infrastructure for its teams, and attract even better athletes.

You can't consider anyone outside the university when discussing paying players. They're paying at the market rate, who it goes to is irrelevant to the debate. The question is, if you're going to pay players, what suffers? SU barely operates near the black. Do you cut non-revenue sports? Sacrifice in building and upgrading facilities?

I maintain, if student athletes think there situation is so shitty, then don't do it. No one's forcing you to. You're getting a free education, free housing, free meals, which is more than the vast majority of students, many of whom are actually contributing to a useful skill to the university's mission with the same time that any athlete puts in.

I've done it, I have zero sympathy for their supposed plight. If they want the money, give them what the cost to the university is and let them blow it how they want, but give them no access to academics. Boom, there's $75K per year. Do with it what you want and see what serves you better.

1. You've made my point for me again - the money goes to buildings, coaches, administrators. But not to the student athlete? I'm not against coaches and people making money for doing their jobs - I'm just rooting for players to make a fairer share.

BTW - that is exactly the reasoning that the p5 conference commish are using. All of the money goes everywhere but the players - mostly due to NCAA rules meant for the 350 teams. The 65 p5 teams have said - "we've gotten so big and we've spent so much money on everything - but we're hamstrung by these rules regarding stipends and medical $, etc." ...

2. You have to consider people outside of the university when discussing players. The infrastructure built around the student athletes is a money making machine. The video game guys literally making millions of dollars using your likeness? But you can't charge for that - or be compensated? It's grotesque. Without the players playing - their wouldn't be bowl games and video games and things to watch on TV. The engine that powers the whole deal is the player.

3. It's not about the student's thinking that their situation is shitty. It's that they are smart enough to look around and realize that there is a discrepancy between what they make for the "infrastructure" and what they are compensated for.

4. You're assuming that schools like SU can't pivot to shift money from other areas towards modest improvements for the student, as revenue increases? Coach SS and Gross are for the move are they not?

5. Most students at the school are not contributing a useful skill that is on par with what a football player brings in.

6. It's not about a "supposed plight" - it's about market value. The last to see the benefits are the people that the whole system rests on. That's why the vote happened yesterday. It was an unfeasible imbalance both between the p5 and the rest of the conferences - but also between the overall $ and the student athletes benefits.

 

[retro44]

So if SU gives a full scholarship to a kid from Liberty City in Miami who has a child of their own. Tell me why SU shouldn't give him the full cost of attendance so when he gets one of his 3 weeks off from football that he might fly home to see his child, or be able to have them visit?

Should we say tough luck since only two head coaches make 7 figures or maybe should we take a little bit of bonus money away from the AD and Head Coaches who make well over 6 figures. Why should any Ath Dept employee receive a bonus for meeting APR or graduation rate benchmarks, or for winning a certain number of games? I'd be willing to bet that the bonus money received annually by people at SU could cover a 2k stipend for at 75 students.

Kudos to you for balancing your time and being successful, but don't assume everyone has the same options available to them.

when you plant corn you get corn so why should the university be required to help pay support for a players kid.

Most likely the kid is on welfare and Social services would then be required to take money to help pay for the support.

Then you have students who fully pay their way to school would then indirectly pay for support as the school would have to account for the money in a somewhere budget.

If the player is so concerned about the kid then maybe he should find a real job and become the father they claim they want to be and get married....schools don't need to take care of players babies

 

[retro44]

it's possible to determine the market value of anything, including endorsements. I don't even know what the second part of the sentence means in this context. If the players pose for the pictures and sign the garments, they should be compensated.

go to the Auburn SCUOT board and see their thread on this and you ALSO have to remember that Emmert and Saban are very close, like best friends and Emmert hired Saban at LSU.

Ohio St. got nailed for this and think of us and bill rapp with the B.B. program

 

[CuseOnly]

when you plant corn you get corn so why should the university be required to help pay support for a players kid.

Most likely the kid is on welfare and Social services would then be required to take money to help pay for the support.

Then you have students who fully pay their way to school would then indirectly pay for support as the school would have to account for the money in a somewhere budget.

If the player is so concerned about the kid then maybe he should find a real job and become the father they claim they want to be and get married...schools don't need to take care of players babies

Did you totally miss what he said?

Nobody was talking about the university supporting a student athlete's child...wow, how did you read that into what he said?

He was talking about a student athlete visiting his child in his/her off time which would be part of his family last I checked, just like any other student athlete visiting their families.

Who are you to say that a student athlete's child is on welfare or receives assistance? Wow, what a huge assumption and a great example of stereotyping.

 

[TheCusian]

when you plant corn you get corn so why should the university be required to help pay support for a players kid.

Most likely the kid is on welfare and Social services would then be required to take money to help pay for the support.

Then you have students who fully pay their way to school would then indirectly pay for support as the school would have to account for the money in a somewhere budget.

If the player is so concerned about the kid then maybe he should find a real job and become the father they claim they want to be and get married...schools don't need to take care of players babies

Sheesh. A player should give up their free education and chance to make millions to find a real job (stuck in a low-wage craphole job) so they can be considered a good "father"?

Schools need to take care of their players by supplying more discretionary money or service to compensate for the income the players bring the school. Then the player can do what people with money/services do - use it how they see fit. If they use it to see their kid? Gasp! Might be a good Dad.

 

[CuseOnly]

Sheesh. A player should give up their free education and chance to make millions to find a real job (stuck in a low-wage craphole job) so they can be considered a good "father"?

Schools need to take care of their players by supplying more discretionary money or service to compensate for the income the players bring the school. Then the player can do what people with money/services do - use it how they see fit. If they use it to see their kid? Gasp! Might be a good Dad.

Would definitely be a better father after getting a degree from SU. That would be the smart decision, direct opposite of what Retro was suggesting.

 

[retro44]

[QUOTE="CuseOnly, post: 1100292, member: 2804"


Who are you to say that a student athlete's child is on welfare or receives assistance? Wow, what a huge assumption and a great example of stereotyping.[/QUOTE]

for one, I said most likely...

Reality is THIS IS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS IN THIS COUNTRY and liberty city is not the Hamptons and players have always find their way home.Sure if you give the players a lumpsum on Feb. 1st. they might have the money to fly home,but if given monthly I highly doubt they would save it up. I am not the one who brought liberty city into this to make a point and that is also stereotyping that all players are poor

 

[retro44]

Would definitely be a better father after getting a degree from SU. That would be the smart decision, direct opposite of what Retro was suggesting.

are saying this only pertains to Syracuse Degrees...what about the sham degrees of UNC.

I KNOW ONE PLAYER WHO LEFT SYRACUSE BECAUSE THE STAFF WANTED TO FORCE HIM TO TAKE GENERAL STUDIES AND HE WANTED A REAL DEGREE...FIRST HAND ALSO.

When he first brought it up I thought he was transferring due to a position change ,but when he told me it had to do more with academics I fully agreed with him. All because we are Syracuse doesn't mean we are above everyone else.

And as much as some people like to slam Greg Robinson he let the players take the majors they wanted,as for the next staff...well.....

peoples need to get real about big time college sports

 

[HtownOrange]

The real issue about money is not what the schools and conferences earn. The real money is made by the networks and the merchandisers. While the masses focus on the schools and the players, the only people making real money are the networks and merchandisers. If EA can pay $400-$700, then let them pay the players directly, the players can pay taxes. The schools get their cut for using the school' name, colors, mascot, etc.

Watch the B1G get a TV pay increase. That comes from the networks. They don't give increases unless they know they will make even more money. All of the conferences are underpaid (P5 and G5). Don't be surprised if the P5 band together as one league and arrange a TV deal like the pros do (kind of full circle, but if it nets more $$, the schools will do it). To add insult to injury, look at what the sports announcers are paid and all they do is get to watch more of what we like and discuss it on TV! We pay to watch sports and discuss it freely on boards like this.

 

[Antiprodigy]

The players having to pay taxes is overstated. As long as they make less than $5700/yr they don't really have to worry about it, especially if taxes aren't withheld. Of all the numbers I have heard thrown around, I have not heard anything that high.

My understanding is that generally, as they invest 20-40 hrs/week into the sport, it precludes them from getting a part time job. Treat it as a part time job, require a mandatory number of hours (both min & max) and pay them an hourly wage. This isn't rocket science.

 

[SWC75]

go to the Auburn SCUOT board and see their thread on this and you ALSO have to remember that Emmert and Saban are very close, like best friends and Emmert hired Saban at LSU.

Ohio St. got nailed for this and think of us and bill rapp with the B.B. program

if Ohio State got nailed for this, it must be possible to police it.

 

[retro44]

if Ohio State got nailed for this, it must be possible to police it.

by who...the big 5 now.

Emmert will not

 

[retro44]

The players having to pay taxes is overstated. As long as they make less than $5700/yr they don't really have to worry about it, especially if taxes aren't withheld. Of all the numbers I have heard thrown around, I have not heard anything that high.

My understanding is that generally, as they invest 20-40 hrs/week into the sport, it precludes them from getting a part time job. Treat it as a part time job, require a mandatory number of hours (both min & max) and pay them an hourly wage. This isn't rocket science.

students can't go tax exempt when working also...they need to file. Then there is the payroll tax. A smart business student might just want to challenge this in federal court if the players get tax exempt money.

I listened to a former business student on talk radio yesterday who did this subject in a business class investigating the tax code and laws could not figure out how to avoid taxes on cash distributions when the players keep referring as college sports as a big business.

I know guys who go flat 50 on high overtime jobs and the IRS starts knocking at their doors.

 

[TheCusian]

[QUOTE="CuseOnly, post: 1100292, member: 2804" Who are you to say that a student athlete's child is on welfare or receives assistance? Wow, what a huge assumption and a great example of stereotyping.

for one, I said most likely... Reality is THIS IS HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS IN THIS COUNTRY and liberty city is not the Hamptons and players have always find their way home.Sure if you give the players a lumpsum on Feb. 1st. they might have the money to fly home,but if given monthly I highly doubt they would save it up. I am not the one who brought liberty city into this to make a point and that is also stereotyping that all players are poor[/QUOTE]

"I'm not stereotyping!" Next sentence "I'm stereotyping their ability to save lump sums!"