CR Gazette: ISU AD facing potential $147M deficit by 2031 with direct to player payments

StPaulCyclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 9, 2008
2,555
2,463
113
Duh!
So basically we are going to tax "somebody", and take that tax money to pay people to play college sports to entertain us. All good I guess as long as that somebody isn't you.
Taxpayers have been doing this for years to fund pro stadiums across the country, in large part to maintain the economic impact. Now college towns/areas are going to have to consider the same to help maintain the economic impact. This isn’t new, now it’s our beloved Ames and Cyclones.
 

WooBadger18

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2012
15,147
13,549
113
On Wisconsin
Sports betting taxes are paid voluntarily. The lottery is a tax and people choose to play or not. Casino gambling is taxed. Many cities have a higher tax on hotels and travel to fund professional sport facilities.

If people are willing to support paying athletes, they they should have no issue on "taxed entertainment" related to sport.
I think the question is just whether there is a better way to use that money.

Also (and I’m cc’ing @ZJohnson in case I misunderstood their point), I think people aren’t fans of “I’m against x, but there should be an exception in this case because it’s something I want.”
 

jbhtexas

Well-Known Member
Oct 20, 2006
14,325
4,375
113
Arlington, TX
Taxpayers have been doing this for years to fund pro stadiums across the country, in large part to maintain the economic impact. Now college towns/areas are going to have to consider the same to help maintain the economic impact. This isn’t new, now it’s our beloved Ames and Cyclones.

In all of the stadium funding measures here in Arlington that I've been through in the past 30 years (Rangers 1, Cowboys, Rangers 2), the people voted on the tax, and the tax was used to fund bonds that were eventually paid back by the pro team. It doesn't sound to me like that's what would be going here.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: aauummm

BCClone

Well Seen Member.
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Sep 4, 2011
67,697
63,765
113
Not exactly sure.

Sorry if already discussed.
I’m fine with that for an added fee, but if players stink it up, I have no issues with a school literally dropping them and not renewing schollys or any NIL.
 

IcSyU

Well-Known Member
Nov 27, 2007
28,302
6,969
113
I’m fine with that for an added fee, but if players stink it up, I have no issues with a school literally dropping them and not renewing schollys or any NIL.
Its a ******** fee. Not sure if ISU still has one or not but they did when I was in school.

I can see general welfare fees like what pays for student health or the rec centers...but a fee to students just to hand over to the AD is ********. Increase the cost of season tickets. Pass it on to the actual users.
 

ISUTex

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2012
9,898
9,651
113
Rural U.S.A.
And it will be happening across the nation. Some athletic departments will have less difficult decisions because of financial resources but there are going to be a lot of sports going away. Especially on the men's side.

Isn't ISU at the minimum for sports?
 

FarmerCy1

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2020
369
582
93
40
Raise ticket prices and pass it on to the fans. Tax DraftKings and BetMGM. There’s no way students who are probably already going into debt to better themselves should have to subsidize other students who are getting a free education, plus boarding, and throw in their NIL salary as well. Honestly it’s getting to the point where we need to treat college athletes like their pro counterparts- they do great, pay them more. They **** the bed, cut them half way through the season- no scholly, no NIL. It sucks that college sports are this way, and I’m losing interest with time in just about anything outside of ISU, but charging a student fee for the AD is one of the dumbest things I’ve heard.
 

Cyclone06

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
4,033
2,765
113
Urbandale
Obviously I respect everyone’s opinions and you can like what you like but…..

People seriously care less about ISU sports because players get paid now?
It’s definitely lost some of the novelty. It was different than pro sports. Now it’s just a different pro sport.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dosry5

StPaulCyclone

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Oct 9, 2008
2,555
2,463
113
Duh!
In all of the stadium funding measures here in Arlington that I've been through in the past 30 years (Rangers 1, Cowboys, Rangers 2), the people voted on the tax, and the tax was used to fund bonds that were eventually paid back by the pro team. It doesn't sound to me like that's what would be going here.
Probably not. The point is this is about more than funding a pro stadium or paying players. There is a broader economic threat to the university, Ames, greater DSM area and even the state. I not saying I like it, but there is a bigger issue here than paying players. If ISU’s AD falls into irrelevance there will be a significant impact to all of these parties. This $#!+ isn’t mutually exclusive. If interested parties can’t get behind paying players, hopefully they can get behind protecting ISU and the local economy.
 

LAClone

Well-Known Member
Apr 26, 2010
777
891
93
This also makes all the stadium renovations, locker room improvements, Cy Town, etc. feel like sort of a boondoggle. Money now needs to go directly to the players, and not tangential benefits.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: aauummm and dosry5

CapnCy

Well-Known Member
Jul 6, 2010
6,204
3,071
113
I know I said this upthread but it's the same argument and that UNI and the Cedar Valley have made to the legislature and BOR for years and it absolutely does not sway them. There have been several projects, both athletic related and non-athletic related, that would have created significant investment in the community and the university and it's been met with crickets or just flat out resentment.

Hell, UNI asked for $3M for the Dome renovation from the state and it didn't even make it out of committee and that's with a building that had a well documented $25M annual economic impact. The legislature isn't here to help the universities in any aspect.
Very fair point about economic impact and how that argument could be used in many places around the state, actually. Of course we are cyclone fans so bias wanting our economic impact to be valued.

I can also see why the state and others would be very cautious to jump in given how fast things shift/change in this landscape. And I can't even imagine how furious "joe taxpayer" would be at the first coaches multimillion buyout or player known to make millions doing something wrong ...people already do that not always understanding it's not their tax dollars now
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1UNI2ISU

Cyclone06

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 11, 2006
4,033
2,765
113
Urbandale
Whole thing is stupid, we have the lowest sports book tax in the country, just raise it. Problem solved. Idiotic if this doesn't happen in the next session. It's stupid they didn't do it last session.
You think when politicians see that tax Money rolling in they’ll keep their hands off and let it go to the schools/players?
 

Mr.G.Spot

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Apr 22, 2020
5,767
150
113
60
This also makes all the stadium renovations, locker room improvements, Cy Town, etc. feel like sort of a boondoggle. Money now needs to go directly to the players, and not tangential benefits.
Of course it's a boondoggle, per se, but other states have already passed this. Either get in the game to stay or drop down or out. There will be no middle of the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Iowast8isgr8

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron