Started By
Message
re: APU - where do you stand?
Posted on 9/23/13 at 11:02 am to K9
Posted on 9/23/13 at 11:02 am to K9
Not all players get Pell grants and the "stipend" pays for room and board and meal plan. Back when they had Athletic dorms you did not get these monies.
This is not just about free money for playing football. It is about schools only,having to honor scholarships for one year and about not paying for medical related expenses once an injury occurs or once that is a chronic injury sustained during play at the school.
...and the of you don't like it, quit it thing is obviously a sophomoric jab. If you do not like Americas politics leave it.... Right?
Most big football schools have a football team that pays for ALL the other teams and still donates to the school... Also, the teams increase the exposure of the school which is important to them beyond the tangible dollars.
Coach Dooley made $250k towards the end of his career. mark Richt makes well over 10x that and he does not have a NC under his belt. ESPN.... Billions... Nike Millions... They make directly off the play of the players. It was not like that just 20 years ago.
This is such a money maker that schools, even good ones, all but disregard their academic standards and create programs to process these student athletes through the money making system. It is a system that by design, is made to keep kids available for football play and when they can not play, they are left with all but useless credits or degrees and debilitating injuries.
It is easy for grown ups to judge the decisions of 18 year olds, but the people the 18 year olds trust are in the business of keeping them eligible,..
Someone brought up taxes... Good point... Then what about workman's comp? How many players get hurt on the job? How long do NCAA sanctioned football teams continue to pay for injuries sustained whilst on the job? A person working 12 hours a week at the student bookstore has more workman's comp rights than a football player who gets paralyzed.
The affects, long term, of football are debilitating. These are things 18 year olds can not comprehend. Most guys by their early 40s have advanced arthritis and way too many die of heart disease due to enlarged hearts due to steroid use.... Which is passive aggressively encouraged...
I'd love to go back to regional TV, no corp sponsors for Bowl games, and players recruited from student body. It would still be fun to watch and the G would be more important to me than anything else.... But we are so far removed from that now
This is not just about free money for playing football. It is about schools only,having to honor scholarships for one year and about not paying for medical related expenses once an injury occurs or once that is a chronic injury sustained during play at the school.
...and the of you don't like it, quit it thing is obviously a sophomoric jab. If you do not like Americas politics leave it.... Right?
Most big football schools have a football team that pays for ALL the other teams and still donates to the school... Also, the teams increase the exposure of the school which is important to them beyond the tangible dollars.
Coach Dooley made $250k towards the end of his career. mark Richt makes well over 10x that and he does not have a NC under his belt. ESPN.... Billions... Nike Millions... They make directly off the play of the players. It was not like that just 20 years ago.
This is such a money maker that schools, even good ones, all but disregard their academic standards and create programs to process these student athletes through the money making system. It is a system that by design, is made to keep kids available for football play and when they can not play, they are left with all but useless credits or degrees and debilitating injuries.
It is easy for grown ups to judge the decisions of 18 year olds, but the people the 18 year olds trust are in the business of keeping them eligible,..
Someone brought up taxes... Good point... Then what about workman's comp? How many players get hurt on the job? How long do NCAA sanctioned football teams continue to pay for injuries sustained whilst on the job? A person working 12 hours a week at the student bookstore has more workman's comp rights than a football player who gets paralyzed.
The affects, long term, of football are debilitating. These are things 18 year olds can not comprehend. Most guys by their early 40s have advanced arthritis and way too many die of heart disease due to enlarged hearts due to steroid use.... Which is passive aggressively encouraged...
I'd love to go back to regional TV, no corp sponsors for Bowl games, and players recruited from student body. It would still be fun to watch and the G would be more important to me than anything else.... But we are so far removed from that now
3
Posted on 9/23/13 at 11:05 am to Peter Buck
Solid post. I, for one, am glad to see players from both of our schools leading this effort.
Posted on 9/23/13 at 12:29 pm to Peter Buck
Sounds like the same sort of stuff unions say when they want to negotiate more benefits or higher salaries. I hate unions, btw.
Yes, the kids have a choice to play or not to play. Many of these kids probably wouldn't even go to college if they didn't get a free ride playing sports, so their prospects at a better future are improved by the mere fact that they are getting a college education (of some sort) while they play. Those that stick it out and graduate have a bigger leg-up on life than if they didn't go to school at all.
I don't buy into the Communistic argument that the players should get a share of the financial proceeds made by the university and the athletic programs just because they are helping to make the programs money. The coaches make their money because they are employees of the universities, just like the janitors and the professors. Their wages are determined by market factors, like the other positions.
Student athletes aren't getting paid because the universities don't recruit players to fill paid positions on their staff. Athletics are extracurricular activities that students can participate in while they get an education. Also, as much as people love pointing out how much universities rake in on athletics programs, the sad truth is that most programs actually lose money.
Here's an article from Friday that states that UGA had a good year, financially:
So with all the millions we bring in, we (a very conservative-spending program) only made just over $2 million. That sounds like a lot, but that can get spent quickly at the university level. Also, when we talk about players getting paid proportionality to the money they bring in, suddenly you're talking about deficits across the board.
Yes, the kids have a choice to play or not to play. Many of these kids probably wouldn't even go to college if they didn't get a free ride playing sports, so their prospects at a better future are improved by the mere fact that they are getting a college education (of some sort) while they play. Those that stick it out and graduate have a bigger leg-up on life than if they didn't go to school at all.
I don't buy into the Communistic argument that the players should get a share of the financial proceeds made by the university and the athletic programs just because they are helping to make the programs money. The coaches make their money because they are employees of the universities, just like the janitors and the professors. Their wages are determined by market factors, like the other positions.
Student athletes aren't getting paid because the universities don't recruit players to fill paid positions on their staff. Athletics are extracurricular activities that students can participate in while they get an education. Also, as much as people love pointing out how much universities rake in on athletics programs, the sad truth is that most programs actually lose money.
Here's an article from Friday that states that UGA had a good year, financially:
quote:
Against the $98.9 million in revenues, the association had $86 million in operating expenses and about $9.6 million in non-operating expenses, mainly debt payments.
That left the association with a $2.2 million surplus to add to the association’s accumulated reserves.
So with all the millions we bring in, we (a very conservative-spending program) only made just over $2 million. That sounds like a lot, but that can get spent quickly at the university level. Also, when we talk about players getting paid proportionality to the money they bring in, suddenly you're talking about deficits across the board.
Posted on 9/24/13 at 7:28 am to Peter Buck
quote:
Not all players get Pell grants and the "stipend" pays for room and board and meal plan. Back when they had Athletic dorms you did not get these monies.
Are ya'll certain that any scholarship players get Pell Grants? I was under the impression that Pell Grants were need based...if you have an athletic scholarship that should fill your needs....if it doesn't and you qualify for a Pell Grant and you have coaches and people earning a living working in the program who make millions every year that is, to quote Bernie Mac, "some ole bullshite..."
If a UGA player is in need of a Pell Grant them the donors and boosters at UGA are getting a subsidy from the federal government that improves the product they are buying every Saturday in the fall....and again, in the words of Bernie Mac...."thats some ole bullshite"...
Page 1 of 1
Latest Georgia News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News