LadyStanley
Registered User
And Carolina. (Nevada too)
Paywall
Confusion reigns
Paywall
Getting out of control. Propagating all over.
Paywall
Confusion reigns
Paywall
Getting out of control. Propagating all over.
Hopefully this will be the gun-to-the-head the NCAA needs to start making serious changes.So just released that Pennsylvania is now looking at this....dominoes falling?
So long as they don't have to pay any players, yes they can afford it.Can the NCAA afford to fight all these states at once?
Why do all 353 schools have to be equal? Seems like free market principals that a lot of professors at these schools would be teaching these same athletes.
If someone told me you we have to pay you less than your worth because its not fair to the other businesses that they don't have someone of such good quality you would rightly call bs.
And this isn't even pay - just endorsements.
Hopefully this will be the gun-to-the-head the NCAA needs to start making serious changes.
I worked for my university when I was a student, why shouldn't football be treated as a student job?This is one of my two major problems with the discussion. "The NCAA model is broken/archaic! We need to blow up the NCAA model!" And replace it with WHAT, exactly? What would actually WORK in the place of amateurism?
I worked for my university when I was a student, why shouldn't football be treated as a student job?
there have been several [if not dozens upon dozens] of writers/scholars/commentators who have suggested changes/new models. Just a little googling will give you many different ideas, if you don't want to wade through a mass of scholarly papers out there like this 68 page beast: https://www.gwlr.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/83-Geo-Wash-L-Rev-761.pdfThis is one of my two major problems with the discussion. "The NCAA model is broken/archaic! We need to blow up the NCAA model!" And replace it with WHAT, exactly? What would actually WORK in the place of amateurism?
Walk ons don't.College sports players are already getting a scholarship why would they get compensated double.
Scholarships are worthless. Aside from boarding everything else are expenses that schools would have had to pay regardless. Stop overvaluing them.College sports players are already getting a scholarship why would they get compensated double.
Well, not necessarily worthless, but the true cost to the University is far less than the sticker price. Not to mention the poor graduation rates among FB/BB players, and colleges steering those athletes to less desirable degrees like athletic sciences or communications so they can more easily handle the workload of being a full time student and athlete.Scholarships are worthless. Aside from boarding everything else are expenses that schools would have had to pay regardless. Stop overvaluing them.
My company pays me a salary as well as pays my health insurance and funds my 401k, so I am compensated 3 times?College sports players are already getting a scholarship why would they get compensated double.
My company pays me a salary as well as pays my health insurance and funds my 401k, so I am compensated 3 times?
...okay? At that point you are just moving numbers around, like there is no difference between a player getting paid 50k and paying 30k for school and just netting the two and paying the player 20k and giving them free college. But arbitrary rules like that are the NCAAs wheelhouse, so you might just be the next NCAA CEO.My point if players that are on scholarships get paid to play then they should be paying for their education.
You're right. USC should be capped at lining up boosters to pay for a $3.2M coaching salary, multi-million dollar athletic facilities, and celebrity access in hopes of luring every recruit. That seems totally more reasonable.It's still dumb because you have to create rules for a level playing field of 353 Division I schools, covering 88 different sports (while abiding by Title IX).
The idea that USC wouldn't line up boosters who owned businesses to sign EVERY FOOTBALL RECRUIT up to endorsement contracts so USC can basically bribe recruits into picking USC is pure madness. It's going to happen and it can't be policed. And California is saying "That's okay."
The scholarship is "payment" for playing a sport (it really isn't, but we'll set aside that conversation for later)College sports players are already getting a scholarship why would they get compensated double.
I worked for my university when I was a student, why shouldn't football be treated as a student job?
You're right. USC should be capped at lining up boosters to pay for a $3.2M coaching salary, multi-million dollar athletic facilities, and celebrity access in hopes of luring every recruit. That seems totally more reasonable.
Scholarship has almost no value. Stop it.It is. The students work 20 hours a week for a scholarship.
This whole topic boils down to:
1. The NCAA rules look strict and exploitative when viewed from the perspective of “Elite futire Pros who can't get paid in college.”
2. The purpose of those rules are for fair recruiting, so colleges can't bribe players; so that every school can only offer the same thing, which allows students to pick a college based on academics and not the sports team (hahaha).
3. Most people are very dumb on this topic, because they think the individual players have a market value greater than a scholarship. They don't.
- 51 college players were taken in the NBA Draft in 2018, then another 32 guys got two-way G-League deals ($77,500).
What’s the next group down? The G-League one-way contract is $35,000 a year. The average G-League attendance is 2,346.
Ismael Sanogo plays for the Long Island Nets, making $35,000 a year, and playing in front of almost exactly the league average attendance.
Ismael Sanogo was a scholarship player at Seton Hall. His $39,258 tuition was paid for and he played in front of 7,953 per game in 2017-18.
The value of this kid’s game is about the same in compensation, but the interest in the Long Island Nets/G-League brand is 1/3 the interest in the Seton Hall/Big East Brand.
So 1.8% of the NCAA scholarship players are getting less compensation during their NCAA years than they would afterwards (two-way or NBA deals). And 1.9% are getting basically equal worth in school as they would in the G-League.
And 96.3% of all NCAA Basketball Players are getting more compensation from an NCAA program than they are actually worth.
Now, please tell me why this system is broken? Because 80 outliers volunteer to be under-compensated?
You are right, D-I sports is a money loser for a lot of schools (at least on paper). That's why I can live with some contraction, fewer D-I teams, less watered down talent. Teams won't go away, just to D-2 or 3 or NAIA.Again, the argument of "This aspect is cringe-worthy, so let's blow up everything and legalize the things we abhor" makes no sense.
It's funny how no one ever points to the shadiness of someone outside the BCS as "what's wrong with college athletics." It's only programs with TV revenue checks in eight figures. There's so much money at stake for 65 out of 353 schools that they give $5 million contracts to coaches, build $100 million locker rooms and spend millions on recruiting wars. They also "grayshirt" kids who dream of playing for them, or run off the bottom half of their roster after they scholarship restrictions for cheating.
Meanwhile, the other 278 schools, few of whom have any kind of violations are now facing a "We basically have to go undefeated to make the NCAA Tournament" as the BCS purposely tries to squeeze them out to collect more money.
Legalize things who abhors? I don't abhor the people who make money for D1 football and basketball getting paid.Again, the argument of "This aspect is cringe-worthy, so let's blow up everything and legalize the things we abhor" makes no sense.
This is a complete non-sequitur, but okay.It's funny how no one ever points to the shadiness of someone outside the BCS as "what's wrong with college athletics." It's only programs with TV revenue checks in eight figures. There's so much money at stake for 65 out of 353 schools that they give $5 million contracts to coaches, build $100 million locker rooms and spend millions on recruiting wars. They also "grayshirt" kids who dream of playing for them, or run off the bottom half of their roster after they scholarship restrictions for cheating.
Meanwhile, the other 278 schools, few of whom have any kind of violations are now facing a "We basically have to go undefeated to make the NCAA Tournament" as the BCS purposely tries to squeeze them out to collect more money.
so then why should coaches be making millions and have pro style facilities?Again, the argument of "This aspect is cringe-worthy, so let's blow up everything and legalize the things we abhor" makes no sense.
It's funny how no one ever points to the shadiness of someone outside the BCS as "what's wrong with college athletics." It's only programs with TV revenue checks in eight figures. There's so much money at stake for 65 out of 353 schools that they give $5 million contracts to coaches, build $100 million locker rooms and spend millions on recruiting wars. They also "grayshirt" kids who dream of playing for them, or run off the bottom half of their roster after they scholarship restrictions for cheating.
Meanwhile, the other 278 schools, few of whom have any kind of violations are now facing a "We basically have to go undefeated to make the NCAA Tournament" as the BCS purposely tries to squeeze them out to collect more money.
Cause they are faculty, not students, i guess. (Usually the highest payed faculty members too?)so then why should coaches be making millions and have pro style facilities?