Paying College Athletes

[LoganBuck]

Title IX comes into play here. You have to pay the womens synchronized swimming team members the same amount the football team members get. That is why I vote no. The amount of money on the whole would be huge, the benefit to the individual athlete would be small. Probably below "pocket money" for the semester/quarter.

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by LoganBuck

Title IX comes into play here. You have to pay the womens synchronized swimming team members the same amount the football team members get. That is why I vote no. The amount of money on the whole would be huge, the benefit to the individual athlete would be small. Probably below "pocket money" for the semester/quarter.

In essence college athletes are paid. Not only are they given a free education in tuition but also with room and board and books and the absence of any kind of loans.

Also what is the value of a four year bachlor's degree over a lifetime? What is the value of being able to perform on a football stage for 4 years? What is the value of an opportunity at education? Lets be honest here there are a lot of athletes who would not qualify to attend the university without their athletic skills.

Don't get me wrong big time college athletes bring a lot into the university, but lets not forget that if they take advantage of what the university is offering they stand to benefit greatly.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

Don't know. Rovell does a pretty good job here. I guess what I thought was interesting is the small amount of money they would actually make if they were paid for the jersey. Often people forget about all of the cost in the supply chain and also the risk that your individual stores take in selling the jersey. It would interesting to see if a guy like Green would be willing to take the risk in buying up a large quantity of his jerseys to be sold?

You think only 300 #9 jerseys will be in the stands of any home Ga Bulldog game? I think they sell much much more than that especially when you include the many retail outlets

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by reds1869

The bigger issue is agreements between the NFL, NBA and MLB that limit a young player's ability to play pro ball right out of high school. MLB allows draftees to play affiliated ball upon HS graduation but makes them attend college for a few years if they choose to play in the NCAA. The NFL and NBA all but force kids to briefly attend college. So, in essence, the pro leagues have agreements with the NCAA that protect their business interests while limiting the options of talented young players.

That's not an issue at all. The courts have decided it's perfectly legal. Just ask Maurice Clarrett.

There's nothing wrong with a business demanding a minimum age or a certain degree of education before being hired.

If you want to start the Reds1869 Football League and you want to admit kids of any age, you are free to do so. There are other football and baseball leagues and all of them can set their own rules

It's a non issue

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Scrap Irony

The reason the universities make billions (with a B, friends and neighbors) is directly related to the performance of these kids.

It's eminently fair to give the kids money. It's the right thing to do. This is, after all, a billion dollar pie and the kids get squat, other than a seat that costs nothing to the university, a dorm room that costs little, and food that costs less than that.

The problem is that the implementation of the money is impossible to figure out, especially considering how much programs already cheat.

That's not really true. The truth is very few athletics make money. In some cases basketball and football make money but the other 18 or so sports lose money. Are you saying that if you are in one of the few sports that makes money that you deserve a cut and the others do not?

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

You think only 300 #9 jerseys will be in the stands of any home Ga Bulldog game? I think they sell much much more than that especially when you include the many retail outlets

Well he said only 300 this year, which still seems low. Maybe 300 through the bookstore?

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Hoosier Red

Well he said only 300 this year, which still seems low. Maybe 300 through the bookstore?

If he only included the bookstore then it was lazy reporting

[bucksfan2]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

If he only included the bookstore then it was lazy reporting

It would probably be only licensed Nike jersey's.

How many people buy jersey's on a yearly basis? I have a #2 OSU jersey that was bought about 7-8 years ago that has nothing to do with Pryor.

[oneupper]

nm

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

If he only included the bookstore then it was lazy reporting

nm Bucksfan nailed it.

And he's right, especially at schools like Michigan, Penn State, and Syracuse, where the top player at a position is given a specific number. There's no reason to purchase a jersey every year.

[Hoosier Red]

Originally Posted by Roy Tucker

I used to think they should pay college athletes but now I don't think so.

The price tag for a full-ride scholarship is somewhere between $30k-60k. Pretty good money for 18-22 yr. olds. I sure as heck didn't make that flipping burgers all though school. Plus they should (not necessarily will) get a degree out of it.

Yes, there may be some elite athletes that can go pro right out of high school but they are in the vast minority (and they suffer under the existing NFL/NBA setups). Probably 98-99% never go above college athletics and go into being regular citizens.

The only quibble I have is spending money for athletes. They need some pocket money for whatever floats their boats.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/...s+the+money+go

They do get spending money to be fair. They get a housing and food stipend that would cover enough for them to live by themselves. If you have four guys room in a $800/month apartment off campus, that's $750-$800 to spend per month on food. And remember, they eat a lot of meals at the football complex for free.

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by LoganBuck

Title IX comes into play here. You have to pay the womens synchronized swimming team members the same amount the football team members get. That is why I vote no. The amount of money on the whole would be huge, the benefit to the individual athlete would be small. Probably below "pocket money" for the semester/quarter.

Title IX would have nothing to do with it. All that says is that women must have an equal opportunity to compete.

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by bucksfan2

It would probably be only licensed Nike jersey's.

How many people buy jersey's on a yearly basis? I have a #2 OSU jersey that was bought about 7-8 years ago that has nothing to do with Pryor.

I'm pretty sure that retail outlets at my local malls have licensed jerseys. Why make the distinction?

[Sea Ray]

Originally Posted by Chip R

Title IX would have nothing to do with it. All that says is that women must have an equal opportunity to compete.

No, I don't think you're right about that.

Title IX:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance...

The "benefits of" would refer to stipends. You can't pay the football players something and not the swim team

[LoganBuck]

Originally Posted by Sea Ray

No, I don't think you're right about that.

Title IX:



The "benefits of" would refer to stipends. You can't pay the football players something and not the swim team

To further expound on this, walk ons are excluded from some of the perks of being scholarship athletes. For example, meals at the football facilities. At Ohio State, backup QB Joe Bauserman was originally listed as a preferred walkon, because the Pittsburgh Pirates were paying his tuition. He was not allowed to participate in scholarship dining, and his access to programs for scholarship athletes put a wall up between him and the team. Which is not good for a key member of your football team, so Jim Tressel put him on scholarship. If those services were offered to all walkons the NCAA would see that as extra benefits.

Where do you draw the line, do walk ons(or non scholarship athletes), or athletes in non revenue sports with split scholarships get money?

It isn't so simple.