NCAA Conferences Looking Into Paying Players

[klunderbunker]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=6566975

That's not the link to the original article which was about the Big Ten looking into this but it mentions the original.

Anyway in short, conferences are looking into adding a few thousand dollars in stipends to players throughout the season, in essence paying them. This presents a ton of problems which all explain why it's a bad idea that is more or less guaranteed to happen.

1. If one conference does it, every conference does it. If the Big Ten starts doing this, how long will it be before the SEC, Big 12, Big East etc all jump on board with it also? More or less you would have to, as players are likely going to pick a place where they can get some money rather than just regular NCAA benefits.

2. Where's the limit to this? If say Ohio State offers a player $3,500 a year to play ball, what's going to stop say Tennessee from offering $5,000? Boosters at these schools would have zero issue coming up with the money needed to pay these guys probably upwards of tens of thousands of dollars a year to play for a certain school. In that case they might as well be having a regular job.

3. What sports get paid? In college sports, two sports bring in money 99% of the time: men's basketball and football. Something tells me the water polo captain isn't going to be paid $1,000 a year to come to school. Why is it fair to pay one sport a great deal of money and another has to get by on what they already have? It isn't but that the way things are going to be. Also it brings the issue of Title IX into things as well as other than a few schools, women's sports don't bring in a ton of revenue.

4. Where does the money come from? From what I've heard it comes from the TV revenues. That's fine in theory, but what happens when you have a shortfall in money and tuitions go up? Why should an average student have to potentially pay more in costs to go to school so that a star middle linebacker can come to school? Explain that to parents that have to work harder to send their kids to school when they don't have a million dollar a year job lined up for them in a professional sports league.

In short, this is a bad idea and it's likely going to happen as the whole idea of amateur athletics goes further into the ground.

Thoughts?

 

[Big Sexy]

1. If one conference does it, every conference does it. If the Big Ten starts doing this, how long will it be before the SEC, Big 12, Big East etc all jump on board with it also? More or less you would have to, as players are likely going to pick a place where they can get some money rather than just regular NCAA benefits.

For one conference to implement the "full cost of attendance" plan it would require legislative approval from the full NCAA D1 membership. I highly doubt that would occur anytime soon.

2. Where's the limit to this? If say Ohio State offers a player $3,500 a year to play ball, what's going to stop say Tennessee from offering $5,000? Boosters at these schools would have zero issue coming up with the money needed to pay these guys probably upwards of tens of thousands of dollars a year to play for a certain school. In that case they might as well be having a regular job.

I guarantee that if something did get passed there would be some set number or small range that schools could provide. The "full cost of attendance" is just about covering costs like transportation and clothing so it wouldn't be a huge number. Boosters also wouldn't have much affect. Whatever the NCAA implemented as a money range couldn't be exceeded and the range would be small.

3. What sports get paid? In college sports, two sports bring in money 99% of the time: men's basketball and football. Something tells me the water polo captain isn't going to be paid $1,000 a year to come to school. Why is it fair to pay one sport a great deal of money and another has to get by on what they already have? It isn't but that the way things are going to be. Also it brings the issue of Title IX into things as well as other than a few schools, women's sports don't bring in a ton of revenue.

These issues are why nothing will be passed anytime soon. A conference or a school can't just randomly put something like this into place without NCAA approval.

4. Where does the money come from? From what I've heard it comes from the TV revenues. That's fine in theory, but what happens when you have a shortfall in money and tuitions go up? Why should an average student have to potentially pay more in costs to go to school so that a star middle linebacker can come to school? Explain that to parents that have to work harder to send their kids to school when they don't have a million dollar a year job lined up for them in a professional sports league.

More problems that are going to prevent this from happening anytime soon. There are just way too many questions that prevent this from happening. However, I will say that the football and basketball players from high revenue schools do deserve more then what they get. With all the money the players make for the select few athletic revenue getting universities they should get a little something. There just isn't a current way for it to happen with NCAA approval.

 

[Kermit]

First of all, if you don't think this is already happening then you are oblivious. It happens all the time; just some people are smarter in the way they do things. I'm a huge college football fan and I've been on the fence since I could comprehend this topic.

On one hand you have these college players drawing in a huge amount of money for their school, depending on the program. They are superstars and big organizations sell jerseys with their numbers and all sorts of things pertaining to the one student. That student is technically never suppose to see a dime of that income. Like you said, not all players are at this status so where you draw the line for who gets what could become messy. I think the biggest argument comes with the fact that people are already doing it, so why not just make it legal so players don't have to get punished for it when it is exposed. Again, you are stupid if you don't think this is already happening.

On the other hand, what stops a top notch program such as USC from paying all the big time recruits more money to come to their school. Thus stealing all the talent from that conference region. You will begin to lengthen the gap in talent by a far wider margin between programs. Those kids are going to college to mainly excel in their career, which to some of them it is football. An English Major shouldn't get paid a teacher salary while he is still studying in school just because he is the top English Major in nation.

Am I happy about college's raking in a lot of dough from a college player's likeness and "image?" No. Do I think college players should be payed for being better than others? Probably not.

The one thing that has always bugged me is the difference between college basketball and college football. Basketball players only have to play one year of college to go into the NBA. Football players have to wait until their junior year in order to go in the draft. I think the concept of waiting until your junior year is better. It's more of a humbling experience to do something you are good at for a couple years without being paid millions of dollars before you just rush into. Which is why i think the more NBA basketball player send up broke and overspending beyond their means. I would bet that the ratio is much higher in that area than it is with NFL players.

Just my two cents.

 

[Sinister Shadows]

even the thought of starting to pay student athletes is terrible. where does it stop? when do players start holding out after sophmore year, had the might as well hire an agent while in highschool? many players are getting tuition covered to play sports, how is that not considered payment? (I would gladly let someone pay my school cost by the way so i didn't need the loans...) tuition rates will go up to cover the rising cost. why should the average student have to pay even more to go to school just so they can have a better sports team?
Personally i see no way possible for it to have an upside.