Jake McDonough talks about paying players.

[intrepid27]

I just can't fathom any way in which allowing players to be paid will reduce cheating.

Now: "Hey -- we can't pay you legally, and nobody else can either, so here's $20,000 'under-the-table' if you choose us over them."

Then: "Hey -- we can legally pay you exactly the same amount as every other D1 school in the major conferences, so here's $20,000 'under-the-table' if you choose us over them."

I agree 100% that this would not reduce cheating. But why not help out the 80% (my guess) of college athletes who get nothing under the table. Most college athlete are hard working, decent kids. They sacrifice their bodies and sometimes more for our enjoyment. They make millions of dollars for their universities Why not reward them?

 

[VeloClone]

I agree 100% that this would not reduce cheating. But why not help out the 80% (my guess) of college athletes who get nothing under the table. Most college athlete are hard working, decent kids. They sacrifice their bodies and sometimes more for our enjoyment. They make millions of dollars for their universities Why not reward them?

I would really like to know how many millions are going to the University and how many millions are going to the athletic departments which is in turn sinking that money back into the student athletes. I'm confused as to what this money is doing if it isn't being used to improve the environment and comfort of the student athletes. If this funding goes away all those nice perks the student athletes enjoy such as flying rather than bussing, indoor and 24 hour practice facilities, big time stadia, state of the art weight rooms, training tables, academic tutoring and related resources all go away as well.

 

[Mr Janny]

I would really like to know how many millions are going to the University and how many millions are going to the athletic departments which is in turn sinking that money back into the student athletes. I'm confused as to what this money is doing if it isn't being used to improve the environment and comfort of the student athletes. If this funding goes away all those nice perks the student athletes enjoy such as flying rather than bussing, indoor and 24 hour practice facilities, big time stadia, state of the art weight rooms, training tables, academic tutoring and related resources all go away as well.

I don't know that your should have led with that one. Flying is not a perk in most cases. It's a requirement in order to maintain the schedule that the school has determined. If we bussed players down to some of the more southern Big XII schools, the NCAA's "student athlete" label would be even more of a joke by adding to the already large number of classes players miss when they travel. Large stadiums don't really have any tangible benefit to the athlete, either. Yeah, they might be cool to play in, but the field is still 100 yards. The schools are the beneficiaries of the big stadiums.

 

[VeloClone]

I don't know that your should have led with that one. Flying is not a perk in most cases. It's a requirement in order to maintain the schedule that the school has determined. If we bussed players down to some of the more southern Big XII schools, the NCAA's "student athlete" label would be even more of a joke by adding to the already large number of classes players miss when they travel. Large stadiums don't really have any tangible benefit to the athlete, either. Yeah, they might be cool to play in, but the field is still 100 yards. The schools are the beneficiaries of the big stadiums.

There are already a lot of flights that are not necessary but rather a convenience. If flying is not an option the schedule will change and there will be a lot of players who will get really tired of bus rides. Flying sucks but it is much better than the alternative. Large stadiums generally come with really nice lockerrooms, training/taping rooms, etc. Besides how many times have you heard about a recruit being impressed with a stadium or arena and wanting to "play in a big time venue like that"? It may be for the fans as well, but it certainly does make a big difference to a lot of the players.

 

[Mr Janny]

There are already a lot of flights that are not necessary but rather a convenience. If flying is not an option the schedule will change and there will be a lot of players who will get really tired of bus rides. Flying sucks but it is much better than the alternative. Large stadiums generally come with really nice lockerrooms, training/taping rooms, etc. Besides how many times have you heard about a recruit being impressed with a stadium or arena and wanting to "play in a big time venue like that"? It may be for the fans as well, but it certainly does make a big difference to a lot of the players.

ok, but a flight to Waco is never a perk. And it's not just a convenience for the athlete. Depending on where they're going, a long bus ride is tiring, and more time consuming. Is it the athletes choice on whether they'd like to fly or not? Do they generally get a say? If not, then it's not really a perk. it's a requirement.

 

[VeloClone]

ok, but a flight to Waco is never a perk. And it's not just a convenience for the athlete. Depending on where they're going, a long bus ride is tiring, and more time consuming. Is it the athletes choice on whether they'd like to fly or not? Do they generally get a say? If not, then it's not really a perk. it's a requirement.

Are they required or do they get a say whether they lift in the Football weight room or somewhere else? Where do you draw the line at it being a perk to have something better than the alternative even if it is required?

Besides I was thinking more of flights to Minneapolis for NCAA games for example. Certainly drivable but they flew. Could have chartered a bus but it was more convenient for everyone. Without the funding this would be a bus ride no question.

 

[jbhtexas]

Selling their likeness would be only acceptable to approved vendors. No individuals and no businesses owned by a major booster.
Said vendors are required to spread their money around -- a minimum of 2 conferences and a minimum of 3 schools per conference and all schools within say 10% of each other. Also an overall total minimum expenditure.

Ultimately, this system could still limit the ability of players to fully profit from their likeness, or prevent them from profiting at all if none of the approved vendors want to give a deal. You can bet the first time that some Johnny Football doesn't get the deal he expects from the approved vendors, or has proof of a better deal from a vendor not on the approved list, or doesn't get a deal at all from the approved vendors, this arrangement would be challenged in court as monopoly.

I really don't see any way that this likeness licensing can be regulated without ultimately ending up being challenged in court, sans forcing the vendors to give a deal to every player who wants one.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Ok, that's fine, but it's still apples to oranges when you're talking about the true, measurable, dollar value of a scholarship, in a legal sense, and comparing it to the potential value of a degree.

Do you want to talk about how much they are compensated or how much they are compensated compared to what the school makes? I see this as another instance where people are ****** someone is making money. If the NCAA's bottom line was zero and the athletes were in the same situation, no one would care. No one really wants to talk about the true value of what athletes receive because it's a huge amount. Far more than any normal student can receive going to school and working full time.

 

[ExCyment]

Cap coaching staff salaries and numbers
Pay all scholarship and non scholarship athletes small standardized wage based on hours of work.
Curb the king football mentality. It is making a select few rich while profiting on the rest.
Medical expenses for all athletic injuries should be 100% while in school.
Life long injuries should receive a payment from an NCAA owned fund.
NCAA should contribute more to general scholarship funds for students

Never will happen by hey that's my take

I agree with all of this along with further limits on practice times and dead periods for each sport. Heck, high schools in Texas should have that.

 

[VikesFan22]

Maybe someone else has already said it but listening to people complain about athletes voicing their opinions is more annoying than hearing the athletes' opinions.

 

[Dandy]

Like I said earlier, Jay Bilas calls people out on this stuff almost daily. Tweeted a few hours ago:

@JayBilas: Amateur sports, huh?! http://t.co/Ac09zvKWVP Cue the Texas AD on the burdensome cost of a scholarship. How lame.

 

[CycloneErik]

Like I said earlier, Jay Bilas calls people out on this stuff almost daily. Tweeted a few hours ago:

@JayBilas: Amateur sports, huh?! http://t.co/Ac09zvKWVP Cue the Texas AD on the burdensome cost of a scholarship. How lame.

More thorough reporting on AD expenses in general is needed to justify where all this money goes.
A friend and I were reading the ISU report for our own athletic department, and there are some odd #s in there. At one point, football (I think) had a listing simply as 'other' for $500,000.

It's not the clearest report, but it looked as though money just bleeds around the place.

 

[Mr Janny]

Do you want to talk about how much they are compensated or how much they are compensated compared to what the school makes? I see this as another instance where people are ****** someone is making money. If the NCAA's bottom line was zero and the athletes were in the same situation, no one would care. No one really wants to talk about the true value of what athletes receive because it's a huge amount. Far more than any normal student can receive going to school and working full time.

No, I want to talk about the dollar value of the scholarship as it compares to the true cost of attendance at the school. You're tied up in the value of the degree that they can attain, and I'm not disagreeing with you on it's value. I'm strictly speaking of the that "cost to attend" number and how, in many cases, the dollar value of an athletic scholarship is lower than that number. If the courts decide that the NCAA is a cartel, then it's basically a slam dunk anti-trust violation, based on that. Potential value of a potential degree wouldn't be a factor. There's a reason why there are rumblings in the power conferences about providing full "cost of attendance" scholarships. It's because the AD's recognize it as a vulnerability.

 

[Cycsk]

I'm still wondering how paying athletes will work with non-revenue sports and students on partial athletic scholarships? They face greater financial hardship.

 

[BringBackJohnny]

I'm still wondering how paying athletes will work with non-revenue sports and students on partial athletic scholarships? They face greater financial hardship.

You either have to pay them all or pay none. If you pay them all you will see schools start to cut sports so they can stay competitive in King Football.

The NCAA needs to come in with a soft benefits plan sort of thing to improve quality of life for NCAA athletes. Healthcare, meals, travel, scholarship guarantees, etc.

 

[TedKumsher]

I agree 100% that this would not reduce cheating. But why not help out the 80% (my guess) of college athletes who get nothing under the table. Most college athlete are hard working, decent kids. They sacrifice their bodies and sometimes more for our enjoyment. They make millions of dollars for their universities Why not reward them?

That's fine -- my point was just that you can't use the argument that paying players will eliminate/reduce cheating, or level the playing field.

 

[19clone91]

This will only further the gap between the Alabamas and the Iowa States. Don't like it one bit

 

[clone52]

If they could come up with a fair plan I wouldn't have a problem with paying players but I have yet to see one that even comes close to addressing all the problems. Even allowing them to sell their autographs is problematic. Say a booster buys one for $10000.

The NCAA should set up a student athlete loan program. Allow student athletes to get a loan through the NCAA that is subsidized. If they obtain a degree, interest on the loan while they were in school is 0%. After they graduate, they pay back the loan with whatever interest rate the NCAA decides they want to give.

The NCAA should set up a student athlete work study program. Employers could sign up to provide jobs to student athletes. Make the pay something standard across the entire NCAA, say $10/hour, or whatever number. Limit the total number of hours to some value, say 10 hours/week. That way any student athlete could earn an extra $100 a week. The standard wage and limiting the number of hours would prevent corruption. Boosters could even become employers. Lets say I want a student athlete to mow my lawn and I'd pay $10/hour and have them 10 hours a week. Maybe they don't have to do all the work that time, but the dollar amount is pretty trivial as far as swaying an athlete to go to one school over the other. Plus, if all employers have to sign up through the NCAA, they could audit them if they wanted to.

 

[CyDude16]

I would be in favor of raising the stipend given to student athletes. It is impossible for an athlete to have a job between school and sports commitments. If a student athlete's family can not help out they literally have very little to live on.

But I think the amount should be controlled and paid through normal scholarship channels.

********. They can get a job in the off season.

 

[CycloneErik]

This will only further the gap between the Alabamas and the Iowa States. Don't like it one bit

Nothing extends that gulf. That is what it is and always will be.