You go to school to gain either knowledge/skills or a required industry license (which doesn't exist in football) for those professions.
Trevor Lawrence needs neither at this point to get paid, yet he can't.
Has COVID changed your opinion of paying college athletes?
- Thread starter JP4CY
- Start date
You go to school to gain either knowledge/skills or a required industry license (which doesn't exist in football) for those professions.
Trevor Lawrence needs neither at this point to get paid, yet he can't.
Not sure. Stiffen the transfer rule unless a personal circumstance or coaching change occurs.
I thought college athletes should have been paid before the pandemic. I haven't changed my mind.
I voted against paying. Paying players is financially impossible for a lot of colleges, so it is just another the rich get richer problem. In addition, who do you pay? Just the sports that generate money? That will never fly.
As far a Covid, l don't see what difference it makes to the players. Are they more likely to get it than the guy working at Walmart? Athletes have better access to medical services and health food than the average essential worker. Just don't get paying players because they might get a virus that everyone else has a chance of getting.
As far a Covid, l don't see what difference it makes to the players. Are they more likely to get it than the guy working at Walmart? Athletes have better access to medical services and health food than the average essential worker. Just don't get paying players because they might get a virus that everyone else has a chance of getting.
Yes, it’s a joke that we’re making these players perform in the middle of a pandemic for no money.
If someone offered me an extra $100K to take a new job in Tempe I’d most likely take it.
They won't have to market themselves. Boosters who want to pay them to play at their school will find them.
The minute they're all paid is when collegiate athletics shouldn't be tax exempt anymore (my argument would be they shouldn't be right now).
There's just something not right about a student maintaining a 3.8+ GPA in engineering or something more than communications and not having their housing, meals, clothing, etc. covered while actually setting themselves up to contribute to society. They leave school with a small mortgage in most cases. Meanwhile the third string kicker gets his degree in leisure studies with significant advantages over a "regular" student...and that isn't good enough?
There's just something not right about a student maintaining a 3.8+ GPA in engineering or something more than communications and not having their housing, meals, clothing, etc. covered while actually setting themselves up to contribute to society. They leave school with a small mortgage in most cases. Meanwhile the third string kicker gets his degree in leisure studies with significant advantages over a "regular" student...and that isn't good enough?
The poll question doesn’t answer the question raised in the thread title. And I think the question raised in the thread title is more interesting - has your opinion changed?
Im with the folks commenting the complexity of figuring out a system that could work.
But, the convo is changing....especially when the scenerio of no students on campus but players playing. And also would create headaches for all other student groups that would want to be present (solar car team, lab TAs, etc)
But, the convo is changing....especially when the scenerio of no students on campus but players playing. And also would create headaches for all other student groups that would want to be present (solar car team, lab TAs, etc)
Zero incentive for them to do so right now. College football provides the farm system and it doesn't cost the NFL a dime.
Yep, and it's unlikely that the NFL will ever make the investment required to have a legitimate farm system.
I'm reminded of the Churchill quote (paraphrasing) "...it has been said that Democracy is the worst form of government...except for all other forms of government..."
Our system isn't great. But I'm dubious about paying players or even allowing them to profit from their likeness. First, I've never really seen an in depth thoughtful version of a plan. "Players should be paid" and "players should be able to profit from their likeness" are fair sentiments but not plans. Second, what will we have gained if by paying players we wipe out half the P5 football programs? It's no skin off the NFLs a$$ if major college football contracts to an NFL lite, 32 teams (or fewer). But ISU won't be on of those teams. I'll ask again, how does paying players not just make the rich, richer?
I think one thing that could be done to help the problem is the NFL changing their rules to allow earlier entry into the draft. Maybe have an advisory board and waiver system that would provide a path to the NFL for those prospects that are ready before three years have passed since their high school graduation. There aren't many, but every now and again we see a freshman stud who could hold his own at the NFL level right now. There's no sense in making him wait three years if he's ready now.
I agree. But as you note, those freshman studs are rare.
Think about what the NFL is getting away with...you have college programs developing these kids skills and strength but then also taking on all the risk. When kids get hurt to the point it diminishes their drafts stock or worse, ends their career, the NFL teams just draft the next kid.
If anyone is going to pay college players it should be the NFL through the conferences.
