NCAA football and pay for play

nddons said:
That would be the University. What makes you think they would be a willing buyer?
Click to expand...

To be rude and answer a question with a question.

What makes you think they wouldn't be?

If not, then abolishing the restriction would have no effect and everybody's happy.

But I suspect, if they're willing to pay Nick Saban $7,000,000/year they're probably willing to toss some scraps to the All Americans.

Not to mention, history has shown they WILL pay the players no matter the rules anyway. Makes great fodder for ESPN when they do and hence, more Bud Light gets sold.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
To be rude and answer a question with a question.

What makes you think they wouldn't be?

If not, then abolishing the restriction would have no effect and everybody's happy.

But I suspect, if they're willing to pay Nick Saban $7,000,000/year they're probably willing to toss some scraps to the All Americans.

Not to mention, history has shown they WILL pay the players no matter the rules anyway. Makes great fodder for ESPN when they do and hence, more Bud Light gets sold.
Click to expand...

I hate Bud Light. ;)

And with that I'm going to give this thread a rest. Nice sparring with you, Bart.
 
I just thought up a good reason NOT to pay the kids. More pay = more commercials.

IMNSHO, no one outside of ad agencies wants that.
 
docmirror said:
I just thought up a good reason NOT to pay the kids. More pay = more commercials.

IMNSHO, no one outside of ad agencies wants that.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding half the population watches football for the commercials, the female half.
 
bartmc said:
Is also a great argument for not paying coaches. Have an existing professor do it for the love of the game. He's fortunate to work or Michigan as it is.
Click to expand...

If you can find someone who'll succeed at the position for zero pay, more power to you. If you can't, you pay the market price.

Same as with college athletes. As soon as you don't have enough takers for your scholarship slots, maybe you need to do something different. Until then, apparently the athletes consider a scholarship adequate compensation.
 
kyleb said:
If you can find someone who'll succeed at the position for zero pay, more power to you. If you can't, you pay the market price.

Same as with college athletes. As soon as you don't have enough takers for your scholarship slots, maybe you need to do something different. Until then, apparently the athletes consider a scholarship adequate compensation.
Click to expand...

Apparently they don't have any other choice. Why not remove the restriction and put your theory to the test? If you're right. Nothing changes.

And Apparently they don't see it as adequate compensation or they wouldn't be organizing a players collective/union right now. Just wait till they strike.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
Apparently they don't have any other choice. Why not remove the restriction and put your theory to the test? If you're right. Nothing changes.

And Apparently they don't see it as adequate compensation or they wouldn't be organizing a players collective/union right now. Just wait till they strike.
Click to expand...

BS. They have unlimited other choices. They could be regular students. They could join the military. They could take one of a million jobs. They could be entrepreneurs. Or, they could accept a scholarship, which must be superior to any of their other options. If it wasn't, they would choose a better option.

As to whether the compensation is adequate, everyone, regardless of their compensation, wants more. If the compensation was truly inadequate, athletes would be walking away from the deal and taking a better one.
 
kyleb said:
BS. They have unlimited other choices. They could be regular students. They could join the military. They could take one of a million jobs. They could be entrepreneurs. Or, they could accept a scholarship, which must be superior to any of their other options. If it wasn't, they would choose a better option.

As to whether the compensation is adequate, everyone, regardless of their compensation, wants more. If the compensation was truly inadequate, athletes would be walking away from the deal and taking a better one.
Click to expand...

There is no better deal. I write software, it's what I do. I do it well. I don't play college football, I don't do it well. There's not a college on earth that would offer me a scholarship. So even that isn't an option for me. I've walked out of jobs because I was underpaid and moved on to write software for someone else because I negotiated a better deal. 18 year old football players do not have that option. Even if half the NFL teams are ready to sign them to muli-million buck contracts… They can't go.

If the current compensation for "college football player" is adequate. Removing the restriction will have zero effect.

Why do you care if they're paid or not?

I don't understand why an uninterested party thinks they have any sort of right to get between a contract negotiation between an 18 year old and a university.
 
bartmc said:
There is no better deal.
Click to expand...

I agree. So if the school is already making the guy/gal the best offer on the planet, why should the school be forced by a legal action to improve the offer?
 
kyleb said:
I agree. So if the school is already making the guy/gal the best offer on the planet, why should the school be forced by a legal action to improve the offer?
Click to expand...

Well, there certainly is a market for a better deal.

The Sherman Antitrust Act comes to mind

Seems like the NCAA is guilty of

Section 2:
"Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony [. . . ]
Click to expand...

I'd vote to convict and throw the dirty bastards in jail.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
Well, there certainly is a market for a better deal.
Click to expand...

Apparently not or there wouldn't be a long line of people hoping for athletic scholarships.

Sherman? Ha. There is nothing stopping you, me, or the players from starting the next pro football league. Understand that the NFL and its exemption are what puts <edit> the brakes on college FB players from going pro early. How's that an NCAA issue?
 
kyleb said:
Apparently not or there wouldn't be a long line of people hoping for athletic scholarships.

Sherman? Ha. There is nothing stopping you, me, or the players from starting the next pro football league. Understand that the NFL and its exemption are what puts <edit> the brakes on college FB players from going pro early. How's that an NCAA issue?
Click to expand...

Then I don't understand your issue with paying them? If there's no market for a better deal. No players get paid above what they do now? Rule goes away, nothing changes. Right?
 
bartmc said:
That looks like it was about TV deals. Looks like the NCAA has a history of ignoring Sherman. If the NCPA catches some steam, we might see another one.
Click to expand...

Yep. There's already precedent. Since 05 the TV/radio/merchandise revenues have made literally billions for the various revenue plus schools. It's brought this situation to a boil, cause there is piles, and piles of cash out there. Look at what's happened to coaching salaries since about 04.

I don't know about jail for breaking the Sherman act, or the one that followed it, but surely the NCAA could be brought down a few pegs.
 
kyleb said:
Apparently not or there wouldn't be a long line of people hoping for athletic scholarships.

Sherman? Ha. There is nothing stopping you, me, or the players from starting the next pro football league. Understand that the NFL and its exemption are what puts <edit> the brakes on college FB players from going pro early. How's that an NCAA issue?
Click to expand...

Other than a barrier to entry that only a few folks are able to overcome. I suppose you're right. But just as soon as it get's going. The NFL has one meeting, removes the restriction and "poof" gone. So, well, yeah there is a lot stopping us.

The relationship of the NFL/NCAA is a mutually beneficial one. The NFL gets a free farm league, and the Colleges get cash cows for 2-3 years. The only one's losing out are the 30 or so guys who just won a $24,000,000 football game and don't get a damn cent for it.
 
docmirror said:
Yep. There's already precedent. Since 05 the TV/radio/merchandise revenues have made literally billions for the various revenue plus schools. It's brought this situation to a boil, cause there is piles, and piles of cash out there. Look at what's happened to coaching salaries since about 04.

I don't know about jail for breaking the Sherman act, or the one that followed it, but surely the NCAA could be brought down a few pegs.
Click to expand...

The NCAA would be wise to throw them a bone IMHO.

What I would do is take a pragmatic approach. Colleges and boosters can't hand them cash that save's their "student athlete" facade . If the players want to take money to push Nike's, sign autographs, speaking engagements, whatever let them. Their career path is athletics, they encourage interns for everything else, why not sports?

That's where the NCAA goes too far IMHO. I mean, trading jersey's for tattoos? That's a big deal? Really? That turns into a major scandal because of the damage it would do to the program if the NCAA found out? Nobody on earth cares if someone trades their property for a tattoo.
 
bartmc said:
The only one's losing out are the 30 or so guys who just won a $24,000,000 football game and don't get a damn cent for it.
Click to expand...

Let's see: Room, board, tuition, & books ~$25k/yr at most schools. Substantially higher in some places.

Top notch diet, free medical assistance, incredible facilities, incredible coaching, tutoring, first in line to register for classes, first in line for dorm space.What do you think it would cost for you or me to buy the same level of coaching, diet, training, tutoring, access, etc. for ourselves or our children? Another $50k/yr on top of the basic college expenses?
 
HAH! I saw "NCAA" and "wise" in the same sentence. lol. Usually, the NCAA does the opposite of what makes sense.

I was hoping to figure out some of how it would work if there was a payment plan put in place. When I think about it, kinda gives me a headache. Some of us are biased due to our involvement with non-revenue sports. If the revenue teams and players want to get snippy about it, they would keep it all to themselves, and I suspect the SCOTUS would eventually have to sort it out.
 
kyleb said:
Let's see: Room, board, tuition, & books ~$25k/yr at most schools. Substantially higher in some places.

Top notch diet, free medical assistance, incredible facilities, incredible coaching, tutoring, first in line to register for classes, first in line for dorm space.What do you think it would cost for you or me to buy the same level of coaching, diet, training, tutoring, access, etc. for ourselves or our children? Another $50k/yr on top of the basic college expenses?
Click to expand...

I did these back-of-envelope estimates for my kid in a major univ eng school. For me, it came out to right around $221k for 4-1/2 years all-in.

Good working money if the student does something with it. If they get a degree in basket-weaving, and don't get an offer from the NFL or NBA, it's kind of a waste.
 
kyleb said:
Let's see: Room, board, tuition, & books ~$25k/yr at most schools. Substantially higher in some places.

Top notch diet, free medical assistance, incredible facilities, incredible coaching, tutoring, first in line to register for classes, first in line for dorm space.What do you think it would cost for you or me to buy the same level of coaching, diet, training, tutoring, access, etc. for ourselves or our children? Another $50k/yr on top of the basic college expenses?
Click to expand...

None of that means much when half the NFL would take you tomorrow for a 7 figure per year contract, and you don't want the degree to being with.

"Worth" is what we're talking about here. "What it cost" means nothing.

And why do you think it's up to anyone but the kid and the university to determine what is fair compensation and what is not? Nobody has bothered to answer that question, I've asked half a dozen times. I sure as hell don't want a legion of Al Bundy's with ego issues saying I shouldn't be paid what I feel I'm worth when there's hundreds of employers eager to pay my demands.

Why do you care? I've asked that half a dozen times.

Why shouldn't the kid be payed if the uni is willing to pay it? I've asked half a dozen times.

All you naysayers want to do is get pedantic and deliberately twist what I say while offering no justification for your own position.
 
docmirror said:
I did these back-of-envelope estimates for my kid in a major univ eng school. For me, it came out to right around $221k for 4-1/2 years all-in.

Good working money if the student does something with it. If they get a degree in basket-weaving, and don't get an offer from the NFL or NBA, it's kind of a waste.
Click to expand...

I went to a good engineering school, not MIT but the college of engineering was well respected. $1,500 a semester (it's up to $3,000 now), offset with grants and academic scholarships (School was basically free). Lived with the 'rents and commuted, tried to schedule 2 or 3 day a week, weeks to minimize commuting costs. Worked 2 simultaneous jobs that I basically used to play on. College was for the most part free for me. Sis had a full ride to play softball at the same uni, after she did the math she figured out the time she was spending on softball was less than a part time job at McD's would pay and quit (and she was a star player). She also didn't like being stuck with 20 lesbians on a bus for 5-15 hours at a time. Ain't no place for a straight girl in the more competitive university's softball programs. (Not trying to go SZ, that's just how it is)
 
bartmc said:
I went to a good engineering school, not MIT but the college of engineering was well respected. $1,500 a semester (it's up to $3,000 now), offset with grants and academic scholarships (School was basically free). Lived with the 'rents and commuted, tried to schedule 2 or 3 day a week, weeks to minimize commuting costs. Worked 2 simultaneous jobs that I basically used to play on. College was for the most part free for me. Sis had a full ride to play softball at the same uni, after she did the math she figured out the time she was spending on softball was less than a part time job at McD's would pay and quit (and she was a star player). She also didn't like being stuck with 20 lesbians on a bus for 5-15 hours at a time. Ain't no place for a straight girl in the more competitive university's softball programs. (Not trying to go SZ, that's just how it is)
Click to expand...

Well, there is something to be said for a job flipping burgers vs doing something you love. If your sis didn't love the sport, and wanted to change majors, that would do it. My kid loves her sport, puts up with a few of the lesbos, and knows that but for her sports ability she would be flipping burgers or waiting beer tables. She feels obligated to contribute to the school through competition, and that's something that is lacking at the revenue schools.

I've come to the conclusion that to kick things off, the way it might work is a stipend, set up by the NCAA for revenue athletes. With a lot of rules in place so that the deals didn't get out of hand, which is a real problem. The stipend would have 'tiers' so that everyone in the revenue program got a cut, but the best players(as it should be) get the best stipend amount.

Now - what about academics? Once the camel's nose is under the tent, what's the point of a academic requirement? If that goes for the revenue players, what about the academic standing for the non-rev players? I guess it's back to the standards in place now for the non-rev, and that's going to put a crimp in the whole deal.

It might have to be split out completely, and make a whole new league of what used to be revenue players, and make it a farm system of the NFL. As it is right now, I don't think the NFL wants anything to do with a pro-farm team, where they would have to pony up money to recruits for 3-ish years.

What a mess...
 
bartmc said:
None of that means much when half the NFL would take you tomorrow for a 7 figure per year contract, and you don't want the degree to being with.

"Worth" is what we're talking about here. "What it cost" means nothing.

And why do you think it's up to anyone but the kid and the university to determine what is fair compensation and what is not? Nobody has bothered to answer that question, I've asked half a dozen times. I sure as hell don't want a legion of Al Bundy's with ego issues saying I shouldn't be paid what I feel I'm worth when there's hundreds of employers eager to pay my demands.

Why do you care? I've asked that half a dozen times.

Why shouldn't the kid be payed if the uni is willing to pay it? I've asked half a dozen times.

All you naysayers want to do is get pedantic and deliberately twist what I say while offering no justification for your own position.
Click to expand...

My justification, while perhaps naïve, is that I want to cheer for student-athletes that actually attend classes and represent my school, not professionals. I know that some of the players with NFL dreams are less than excited to be students, and that some of the very best NFL prospects will be secretly given money or other things of value by agents, but that doesn’t mean we literally go all in and turn college ball into NFL farm teams. If the NFL ever sets up a farm league, great. If not, that doesn’t mean that college athletes must be paid by the universities.

Even at the best football schools, the vast majority of the kids will not advance to the NFL. The main problem I’m seeing is that college ball is the only viable path that there is to the NFL, and the rare kid that an NFL team would gladly hire out of high school or after less than 3 years of college ball can’t skip college ball or leave early. This 3 year rule may be the result of an unholy alliance between the NFL and the colleges teams or their association, but the rule is an NFL rule, not a college rule, and not an NCAA rule.

Get the NFL/Players Union to drop the 3 year wait period, and then let the chips fall where they may. That way, some super-duper blue chip player like Jameis Winston, Reggie Bush, Cam Newton, Maurice Clarett, Mike Williams, etc., can make the jump after 1 or 2 years, instead of 3. You’ll rarely see a kid go to the NFL right out of high school.

In my opinion, it’s an NFL issue, not a college issue.

Just my opinion. Thanks for your thoughts.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
None of that means much when half the NFL would take you tomorrow for a 7 figure per year contract, and you don't want the degree to being with.
Click to expand...

Your issue is with the NFL, not the NCAA. The NFL has an antitrust exemption that allows them to prevent S/A's with less than 3 years in school from entering the league. The NCAA isn't blocking anyone.

And if you don't want the degree, don't go to college. As stated before, you have unlimited choices, choose the one that's best for you. Play ball and get an education. Join the Army. Flip burgers. You choose. If you want a bigger, better deal than what's offered, go find the BBD elsewhere.
 
Something that has not been brought is is that no one has had the ability to make the jump from high school to the NFL. Without at least a couple of years of college ball you don't have the skills or the size to play in the NFL. Is that one year , two years or three years of time there that is needed?
 
kyleb said:
Your issue is with the NFL, not the NCAA. The NFL has an antitrust exemption that allows them to prevent S/A's with less than 3 years in school from entering the league. The NCAA isn't blocking anyone.

And if you don't want the degree, don't go to college. As stated before, you have unlimited choices, choose the one that's best for you. Play ball and get an education. Join the Army. Flip burgers. You choose. If you want a bigger, better deal than what's offered, go find the BBD elsewhere.
Click to expand...

The NCAA exploits the NFL's rule to it's full extent.

There's no other realistic option for a football player to play football. NCAA has monopolized that market.

My issue is billions and billions and billions of dollars being made on the backs of kids who have no other options.

I'll ask again. What is your justification for not paying them?
 
jtheune said:
Something that has not been brought is is that no one has had the ability to make the jump from high school to the NFL. Without at least a couple of years of college ball you don't have the skills or the size to play in the NFL. Is that one year , two years or three years of time there that is needed?
Click to expand...

Correct. You have to go the college route. You think Winston want's to be hassled with 3 years of "Exploratory" major? It might take him 3 years to go to the NFL if he were playing in a farm leauge. In a farm league he'd be making 6-7 figures and not have to hassle with classes and the NCAA's BS. Would be free to hire an agent and sign endorsement contracts etc...

This one's going to the SCOTUS in a few years.
 
Who is the NCAA? Instead of a farm league couldn't the big colleges start playing each other outside the NCAA? Say a collection of the top Southern football schools wanted to exempt themselves from NCAA rules and play each other under agreed upon non-NCAA rules what can the NCAA do?
 
ClimbnSink said:
Who is the NCAA? Instead of a farm league couldn't the big colleges start playing each other outside the NCAA? Say a collection of the top Southern football schools wanted to exempt themselves from NCAA rules and play each other under agreed upon non-NCAA rules what can the NCAA do?
Click to expand...

I don't know the details of their NCAA contracts but with the amounts of $ on the line, I'd bet they're iron clad.

Mark Cuban has floated the idea of funding an endeavor to take down the NCAA. I think he backed away from it, but the idea isn't that crazy.

The NCAA is Gambino Family corrupt.

I'm not normally a union advocate but I hope the players succeed in getting this one done. Their situation is 100% dependent on a bunch old dude's in suit's who stand to make billions and they don't even get to sit at the kid's table.
 
Last edited:
Any of them could go play in the CFL...

Well at least the ones without felonies.
 
bartmc said:
My issue is billions and billions and billions of dollars being made on the backs of kids who have no other options.
Click to expand...

They are 18. They have unlimited options. They choose to attend college on scholarship and play CFB.

The CFB option has been basically the same for 50+ years, so it isn't like the S/A's are surprised at how CFB works. Athletes set themselves on the path, knowing where the path leads and the pitfalls along the way. If that's the path they wish to follow, that's fine. If not, that's OK too.
 
kyleb said:
They are 18. They have unlimited options. They choose to attend college on scholarship and play CFB.

The CFB option has been basically the same for 50+ years, so it isn't like the S/A's are surprised at how CFB works. Athletes set themselves on the path, knowing where the path leads and the pitfalls along the way. If that's the path they wish to follow, that's fine. If not, that's OK too.
Click to expand...

Yup, no gun to the head, they signed on the line. And like Ed posted, even state schools are approaching $50k/yr for tuition/room/board. $50k/yr isn't bad money at all for a college student.

If they think they can do better slinging burgers or tending bar, go for it.
 
kyleb said:
They are 18. They have unlimited options. They choose to attend college on scholarship and play CFB.

The CFB option has been basically the same for 50+ years, so it isn't like the S/A's are surprised at how CFB works. Athletes set themselves on the path, knowing where the path leads and the pitfalls along the way. If that's the path they wish to follow, that's fine. If not, that's OK too.
Click to expand...

What is your opposition to them being paid?
 
Bill Jennings said:
Yup, no gun to the head, they signed on the line. And like Ed posted, even state schools are approaching $50k/yr for tuition/room/board. $50k/yr isn't bad money at all for a college student.

If they think they can do better slinging burgers or tending bar, go for it.
Click to expand...

How bout we just all agree that whatever you want to do for a living is only worth room and board? Just suck it up and go flip burgers, even if you're horrible at it.

What is your justification for not allowing the universites to pay them?
 
kyleb said:
They are 18. They have unlimited options. They choose to attend college on scholarship and play CFB.

The CFB option has been basically the same for 50+ years, so it isn't like the S/A's are surprised at how CFB works. Athletes set themselves on the path, knowing where the path leads and the pitfalls along the way. If that's the path they wish to follow, that's fine. If not, that's OK too.
Click to expand...

Their godgiven talent is football, they want to persue a carrer in it. Who the F is ANYONE to tell them to go flip burgers instead of trying to make a better situation for themself? They have a talent that is EXTREMELY valuable in a mulit billion dollar market and everyone except the guys with the talent are making obscene profit's off them. The current situation is not far from a penal labor colony. How anyone from 'Murica can sit here and claim they know what one party should compensate another and demand it be enforced it by law is mesmerizing to me. It's surreal.

Why do you care what party pays another party for anything when you are neither of the involved parties? You think it will somehow diminish the enjoyment of your Fall Saturday beer drinking events? And you think that's enough of a reason to prevent a willing buyer from selling to a willing seller?
 
bartmc said:
How bout we just all agree that whatever you want to do for a living is only worth room and board? Just suck it up and go flip burgers, even if you're horrible at it.

What is your justification for not allowing the universites to pay them?
Click to expand...

OK, then it needs to be level across all positions across a division.

A Div I starting QB gets paid $FOO, same price across all Div I schools. A Div I backup QB gets paid a price, that price is the same across all schools, etc.

Otherwise the school witht he wealthiest boosters wins, and what's the sport in that?
 
Bill Jennings said:
OK, then it needs to be level across all positions across a division.

A Div I starting QB gets paid $FOO, same price across all Div I schools. A Div I backup QB gets paid a price, that price is the same across all schools, etc.

Otherwise the school witht he wealthiest boosters wins, and what's the sport in that?
Click to expand...

Oh, and what the hell, if you're going to pay them, take the scholorship away. The student athletes (cough cough) truly interested in getting an education can buy it out of their salary. Those that don't care or expect to go pro can pocket that money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top