Started By
Message
re: Arian Foster admits to taking money at UT
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:18 pm to sbrian3915
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:18 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
Which means only the big sports survive, which means only men's basketball and football survive, which brings.....oh wow....Title IX implications!
Not really. The universities would just have to pay for 97 female schollies. Would be a break for them.
0
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:19 pm to ErnestTBassmaster
Universities will never pay players above board. They would have to give up their NPO status. Paying players is the worst idea ever thought up of by anyone. Smaller schools won't be able to ante up to the schools that actually turn a profit, if they can pay them at all. Next thing ya know all the 4&5* players will be bought and paid like the Yankee's. So much for student athletes. What will be next freshman pay scales? Hard or soft salary cap? Paying students is rediculous.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:20 pm to VABuckeye
quote:
Look at Case Western Reserves grants and endowments then look at their athletic program. Kids don't go there for the football team. Here's a novel idea. Build up your academics and money will follow. Don't take this as a slam on the SEC. It isn't intended to be one.
So an endowment that has been growing for almost 200 years is only double of what Texas A&M received in donations last year?
I don't take it as a slam to the SEC at all. I think you are making a terrible argument that ignores the basic FACT that prospective college students care about athletics, and mommy and daddy's money follows.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:21 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
Ehh, Baylor went to the Big XII because they are the most politically connected school in the state of Texas. Endowments had little to do with it, it was just pure politics.
That's the exact point I was making?
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:21 pm to sbrian3915
quote:
This guy gets it. Compared to what a football player at Bama or LSU generates, a scholarship is a pretty paltry return, an exploitative return, actually. Moreover, enough with "we give them a scholarship and they don't have to work for it." They earn the scholarship: they have a talent that is scarce and in high demand, and playing a major college sport is exactly like having a job. So, please, all of us can tell sad stories about how hard we had it in college, but don't compare yourself to these athletes.
quote:
Find me an athlete on a full scholarship condemned to 10-15 years of post collegiate crippling debt over college loans and then we will talk.
Precisely my point. That athlete had a talent that allowed him to earn a scholarship. The same could be said of a brilliant chemistry student; he or she had a talent, too. The difference? The chemistry kid does not generate revenue, at the time he is a student, that benefits the university. But the chemistry whiz also will get a full academic scholarship and will have no student loans to repay, either.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:26 pm to ErnestTBassmaster
quote:
The chemistry kid does not generate revenue,
Actually that student will help bring in grants to the university, by working under professors applying for research grants etc. sports aren't the only way schools make money.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:26 pm to Crompdaddy8
I don't see how any players could afford to be a student athlete of the money they get. I bet the diet of a football player can get pretty expensive. I know they get a stipend for supplements.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:27 pm to 10888bge
quote:
sports aren't the only way schools make money.
Most schools, in fact almost every school loses money on athletics.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:28 pm to 10888bge
quote:
Universities will never pay players above board. They would have to give up their NPO status. Paying players is the worst idea ever thought up of by anyone. Smaller schools won't be able to ante up to the schools that actually turn a profit, if they can pay them at all. Next thing ya know all the 4&5* players will be bought and paid like the Yankee's. So much for student athletes. What will be next freshman pay scales? Hard or soft salary cap? Paying students is rediculous.
I also think people's perception gets distorted by the fact that the system in place has created giant fan bases at a few programs where intrest is focused and the inequity is magnified as a product of circumstance. Say Texas A&M was only allowed to play programs of equal or somewhat equal resources, what would their record be? Even two or three extra losses a year, has a huge effect on fan interest. Without the North Texas's and Sam Houston States of the world, the system isn't the same, and do those kids that line up on the other side of the ball while Johnny Manziel embarrasses them on the way to Heisman glory not deserve some sort of system in place to get equal treatment? I like the NCAA's concept. A lot of their implementation is beyond stupid, but what happens when LSU comes back down to earth and returns to 90s form like they should? When they are losing games in embarrassing fashion, will people be clamoring for them to get 50k a year for blowing a defensive assignment?
The only thing I could ever support is a trust fund or a retirement program that is contingent upon getting a degree, and is equally accessible by all Division 1 athletes.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:28 pm to ErnestTBassmaster
quote:
This guy gets it. Compared to what a football player at Bama or LSU generates, a scholarship is a pretty paltry return, an exploitative return, actually. Moreover, enough with "we give them a scholarship and they don't have to work for it." They earn the scholarship: they have a talent that is scarce and in high demand, and playing a major college sport is exactly like having a job. So, please, all of us can tell sad stories about how hard we had it in college, but don't compare yourself to these athletes.
No one told these kids they have to suffer through going to school with their talent that is scarce and in high demand. They can go play for one of the various other leagues out there, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_leagues_of_American_and_Canadian_football, get paid and try to make it to the league. Why arent they doing this more?
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:28 pm to Lycanblooded
quote:
I know they get a stipend for supplements.
Stipend? That's small-time shite. Most big programs have a team of nutritionists monitoring diets and have access to free supplements.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:31 pm to Lycanblooded
quote:
I don't see how any players could afford to be a student athlete of the money they get. I bet the diet of a football player can get pretty expensive. I know they get a stipend for supplements.
Dietary and housing are HUGE costs, and they need to look in to specifically reforming it for the betterment of the athlete. They get huge per diems for road trips as well, from what I've seen 4 or 5 weekend per diems for a football player could cover a couple month's rent
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:31 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
but what happens when LSU comes back down to earth and returns to 90s form like they should?
That hook has titties, pancake titties. You might want to re bait your hook.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:32 pm to ErnestTBassmaster
I agree with everything you said. I just hope you realize that people who can't figure that out on their own basically have no understanding of economics and are reacting emotionally.
For anyone who disagrees with Bassmaster, I'm calling you an idiot. you're bad. and you should feel bad.
For anyone who disagrees with Bassmaster, I'm calling you an idiot. you're bad. and you should feel bad.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:32 pm to scrooster
quote:
Name another industry that pays 18-21 year olds the kind of money they already receive in benefits as student athletes.
Well, sports is entertainment. Yet unlike other similar entertainment industries like tv, movies, music, etc where kids with talent & no training can become overnight-household-name-millionaires.
The football tie-in with educational institutions is absurdly non-sensical. It's like telling Taylor Swift she has to make music free for 4 years while studying forensic science, then you can go record and sell an album after signing with Warner Bros where she can proudly show them that useless degree in forensics.
But instead of the NFL making the big bucks in minor league TV revenue, etc.. (as they should), they let the NCAA handle the business cuz it would be business-suicide to piss off the millions of people ingrained in the deeply-rooted tradition of cheering for their favorite college team.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:34 pm to npt817
quote:
No one told these kids they have to suffer through going to school with their talent that is scarce and in high demand. They can go play for one of the various other leagues out there, LINK get paid and try to make it to the league. Why arent they doing this more?
Because at the root of it all... they only have this extreme money generating monster because of the fans... and they only have fans because the concept of amateurism(however poorly it exists) is tied to college. If you eliminated college sports, and the only option was a minor league... well you'd have minor league baseball. People aren't there to see these kids athletic abilities. They are there to see these kid's athletic abilities give their school a trophy so they can gloat about their school and their team.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:37 pm to ErnestTBassmaster
quote:
This guy gets it. Compared to what a football player at Bama or LSU generates, a scholarship is a pretty paltry return, an exploitative return, actually. Moreover, enough with "we give them a scholarship and they don't have to work for it." They earn the scholarship: they have a talent that is scarce and in high demand, and playing a major college sport is exactly like having a job. So, please, all of us can tell sad stories about how hard we had it in college, but don't compare yourself to these athletes.
I'm working my way through college now after having an athletic scholarship taken due to injury. Due to this I have seen both sides of the coin. I think you and the poster you commented on have it DEAD RIGHT. The work you put in during practice and games is more than most kids that get academic scholarships do in their 4-6 years.
Saying that...I don't feel sorry for any kids...on either side. If you're privileged enough to be paid to attend college...shut the hell up, take what you're given, and make something of yourself with the outstanding privilege you've been given. If you want to go pro and don't think the college-NCAA route is up to your"standards"....go to the CFL...play and get paid...then hope like hell the NFL sees your worth. Right now the system runs through the conglomerate that is the NCAA. Until that association folds and another is created...nothing will change. But this system is a lot more inclusive than the "let the market pay tuition" system I've seen debated. At least the NCAA doesn't say "Men's football-basketball only". If some of the people here had their way only football and basketball players would ever get into college.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:39 pm to LSUFreek
quote:
Well, sports is entertainment. Yet unlike other similar entertainment industries like tv, movies, music, etc where kids with talent & no training can become overnight-household-name-millionaires.
The football tie-in with educational institutions is absurdly non-sensical. It's like telling Taylor Swift she has to make music free for 4 years while studying forensic science, then you can go record and sell an album after signing with Warner Bros where she can proudly show them that useless degree in forensics.
But instead of the NFL making the big bucks in minor league TV revenue, etc.. (as they should), they let the NCAA handle the business cuz it would be business-suicide to piss off the millions of people ingrained in the deeply-rooted tradition of cheering for their favorite college team.
Really should have a minor league, semi pro system. To call many of our athletes "student athletes" is a stretch. Most schools allow academic waivers so many of their athletes can attend.
Just revamp the system and do it like baseball.
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:39 pm to LSUFreek
quote:
The football tie-in with educational institutions is absurdly non-sensical. It's like telling Taylor Swift she has to make music free for 4 years while studying forensic science, then you can go record and sell an album after signing with Warner Bros where she can proudly show them that useless degree in forensics.
You're acting like these kids athletic abilities are the only things making money. The extreme fan interest, isn't simply to see talent, it is to see that talent win for YOUR school. They tie-in is a mutually beneficial relationship. Johnny Manziel may have garnered a ton of revenue for Texas A&M, but those donations weren't from LSU fans giving to the TAF. It isn't like these absurd figures of money come from the free market. It isn't the NFL. I have donated a TON of money to the 12th Man Foundation, but never have I "donated" to Jerry Jones so I can watch my Cowboys. Do you not see the difference?
Posted on 9/20/13 at 2:40 pm to TeLeFaWx
quote:
they only have fans because the concept of amateurism(however poorly it exists) is tied to college.
Hardly. The cultural root of college football runs much deeper than any minor league baseball team would ever dream of. If schools started paying players a flat salary tomorrow, people wouldn't throw away college football. Like you said...
quote:
They are there to see these kid's athletic abilities give their school a trophy so they can gloat about their school and their team.
Page 13 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News