26CornerBlitz Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 My point Fezmid (pointed to another poster who lamented the fact that he, as I, worked multiple jobs to make it through, and he's still working on paying off his loans)is that those atheletes are making money for the school (I certainly did not, and I'll assume you didn't either). They $give$ back more than they receive. Yet the NCAA is set up to watch every phone call, text message, burger purchased to make sure that THE STUDENT ATHELETE is following the rules while college coaches & administrators are signing fat contracts with every manner of 3rd party to pad their wallets even more than their outrageous salaries already have. The NCAA and by extension the individual conferences and universities/colleges are hypocritical in how they deal with atheletes. You and others point to the 'value of an education' and think that is all they 'deserve'. Meanwhile tickets are sold, merchandise is sold in amounts that far outweigh the 'value of an education'. I don't have a problem with you thinking that an education is all that a scholarship athelete 'deserves' (because really what do any of us deserve). I don't agree with that, I feel that those athletes are due more than the 'value of an education'. But I do have a problem with you or anyone else by extension defending the NCAA and the conferences and the schools. If you don't see what they are engaged in as hypocrisy (which is the point of the thread) then you do not see the situation for what it is (IMO). Very well said Sir!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 They $give$ back more than they receive. Yet the NCAA is set up to watch every phone call, text message, burger purchased to make sure that THE STUDENT ATHELETE is following the rules while college coaches & administrators are signing fat contracts with every manner of 3rd party to pad their wallets even more than their outrageous salaries already have. The NCAA and by extension the individual conferences and universities/colleges are hypocritical in how they deal with atheletes. You and others point to the 'value of an education' and think that is all they 'deserve'. Meanwhile tickets are sold, merchandise is sold in amounts that far outweigh the 'value of an education'. Guess what - every employee gives back to the company more than they get from it. Except maybe government employees.... Otherwise the company wouldn't exist! You apparently don't have a very high opinion of education based on your last comment I quoted. I say an education is invaluable - you can't put a price tag on it. But if you try to, it looks like it's worth about $900,000. "The report titled "The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings" (.pdf) reveals that over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million." http://usgovinfo.abo...andearnings.htm So these student athletes are (potentially) getting $900,000+tuition+room+board. And that's not good enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills99999 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Yes they are given a huge amount of money in the form of tuition. But it does seem kind of crazy to bring these kids in, many who have no money to their name, give them free tuition, but you want to go home for Christmas, and you can't afford the plane ticket,; Oh well too bad, you're on your own. They have free meals at the training table, but you want to go to the movies on the weekend or to a party, again you're on your own. They are not allowed to work so hard for them even to make money. Well they could sell their game tickets, but not allowed to do that either. Personally I think they should be paid the same hourly wage as anyone on work study gets paid for every hour of practice time they put in. I believe they are limited ot 15 hours per week by NCAA rules, so give them 15 hours of pay for that. Spring practice again, pay them for their time. If you ask most kids, they'd rather not practice, but the coaches require it. The more they practice, the better the team plays, potentially giving the school more money. So pay the kids for their time practicing. "HUGE" amounts of money in the form of tuition? Lets use round numbers and talk just about state colleges $20,000, tuition, room board, books, misc expenses The NCAA says a team can only work a player 20 hrs a week in season or off season. They ALL cheat on that, so it is closer to 30 hrs. For sake of this argument we will go with 20. So, that means they make $10.00 an hour. They could make 8 bucks an hour work study signing people in and out of the rec center while sitting at a desk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 The "quality" of the education they are getting is a very different (and very real) issue from the idea that these kids "dont get any benefit." Some kind of small stipend is a good solution to the problems you describe. I go to UB and I bekeive the players there get 400 a month. I havent had 400 dollars to my name since college started for me. Every dime i make goes right to books and my apartments rent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Guess what - every employee gives back to the company more than they get from it. Except maybe government employees.... Otherwise the company wouldn't exist! You apparently don't have a very high opinion of education based on your last comment I quoted. I say an education is invaluable - you can't put a price tag on it. But if you try to, it looks like it's worth about $900,000. "The report titled "The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings" (.pdf) reveals that over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million." http://usgovinfo.abo...andearnings.htm So these student athletes are (potentially) getting $900,000+tuition+room+board. And that's not good enough? OK, you stay up there on your high horse and look at the world your way. I'll take the realistic approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 They ALL cheat on that, so it is closer to 30 hrs. For sake of this argument we will go with 20. So, that means they make $10.00 an hour. They could make 8 bucks an hour work study signing people in and out of the rec center while sitting at a desk I like how you just make up 30 hours. You may be right, but I doubt it's anywhere near that high most of the year. During the season maybe, but what about the other half? So I think $20-$30/hr is probably pretty accurate. OK, you stay up there on your high horse and look at the world your way. I'll take the realistic approach. I argue my opinion with numbers, you argue with insults. Nicely played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I like how you just make up 30 hours. You may be right, but I doubt it's anywhere near that high most of the year. During the season maybe, but what about the other half? So I think $20-$30/hr is probably pretty accurate. I argue my opinion with numbers, you argue with insults. Nicely played. No, he's arguing reality. Your argument fits the varsity sport of fencing, not Div I football or basketball. If you're going to start arguing college economics, where do you factor in deals like this? I doubt that varsity fencing gets the ratings for Comcast to pay hundreds of millions for the rights. When you factor the money that big sports generate for the big college programs and think that it's perfectly fine for them to be content with a $400/mo stipend? And where in the world do you dig up the $900k figure? Annual tuition, room & board for out of state Ohio State students runs bout $35K. So tell me that Pryor hasn't earned $150K for the school over his four years there? How much change does Big 10 pocket from selling calendars, jerseys, coffee mugs and posters with his face on them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I agree that ADs' and coaches' salaries are out of control. Normally I would say it's a free market, but these are tax dollars and kids' tuitions that are going to this. Someone has to stop this nonsense. What does an athlete get out all this? They get a free college education and sometimes even admission over others with similar SAT scores. If they don't treat that education as an opportunity, how are we to get too worked up? Now if coaches are lying to them about their chances, that needs to be addressed. At the school where I teach, that scholarship would be worth over 100,000 for 4 years. That's more than I made in my early 20s. Most D1 football programs are not only self sustaining, but also add money to the rest of the athletic dept (including scholarships for kids who will graduate and take advantage of the opportunity) and the rest of the school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nervous Guy Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 And where in the world do you dig up the $900k figure? That's the difference between a high school grad and a college grad's lifetime earning potential. "The report titled "The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings" (.pdf) reveals that over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million." http://usgovinfo.abo...andearnings.htm So these student athletes are (potentially) getting $900,000+tuition+room+board. And that's not good enough?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Remember last off-season when there was a lot of jockeying and recruiting schools to setup so called Power Conferences....Well that was all about generating more revenue in the way of television contracts, ticket and merchandising sales, AQ BCS appearances, etc....all this is only possible with the "student" athletes that play on the field. Yet college football and basketball is amateur competition....Total unadulterated BS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bartshan-83 Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 The few and proud stragglers of the college football board had a brief discussion on this a few months ago: Link But for sake of consolidation, here were/are my thoughts on the matter: College sports (especially men's basketball and football) are money-generating enterprises that rain cash down upon several parties. The schools, the conferences, the NCAA, TV networks, etc. Nothing about this resembles an amateur situation. These are high-profile minor leagues. And the shameless revenue-whoring and money-grabbing that all of these parties partake in is viewed with hardly a batted eye. I don't agree with the "free education" argument because the behavior of the parties involved belies its equity. Every college football program in the country uses up their scholarship allotment because they know it's a steal on ROI. No college in the country is doing any star high school athlete a favor by offering him a scholarship. Quite the reverse. And scholarships have been the standard compensation for generations. Yet the amount of money generated by the sports has increased astronomically. And the main point is that modest payment to players would do more to combat impropriety and this cesspool culture that pervades college athletics. I'd wager that the vast majority of misconduct (or temptation to engage in it) occurs with players who have nothing and want just a little. It's easy to cast them as spoiled and greedy with their free education, room and board and perks of being an athlete. But it sucks having no money in college (anytime actually). I knew guys at ND who were ballin on the field but didn't have 10 bucks to grab a pizza. They can't get jobs, FOOTBALL is their job and I guarantee it's like working 40 hours and going to school full-time. How tempting would it be to take $1500 from a booster when you're scoring TDs every week but can't afford to take your girl to dinner and a movie? I don't condone it, but I understand it. Reggie Bush and Cam Newton are not the reality of college cheating. It's the 1K payments, the plane tickets or the cushy no-show job. Let's say you work at the Gap in college 35-40 hrs/week...you might pull in $1000 a month. I bet if colleges paid players that amount there would be a huge drop in impropriety among NCAA athletes. Whether or not people think of big money college sports as minor leagues, the fact remains that they are closer to that then they are to being representative of the school in general. So I think you have to make a choice: 1. Tear the entire system apart and make college athletics subservient to the academic requirements of the school. Meaning, students who choose to participate in their school's varsity teams would come from the pool of students who were accepted to the college. If you can run a 4.3 but got a 950 on your SAT, you aren't going to a school that requires a 1150. College athletics would be about students competing against other students. Setup true minor leagues where 18 year old athletes could pursue their profession the way anyone else does and get paid the way anyone else does. I thought it was so great when Brandon Jennings went to Europe to play basketball 2 years ago (if you aren't familiar, Jennings was a top-10 recruit to initially verballed to Arizona. Then he decided he could make money and improve his game by signing with a European team. He did that for 1 year and then entered the NBA draft and was one of the best rookies last season). 2. Accept that college will always be the vehicle for big time athletes trying to make the jump to the pros. This is much more likely and I can't even say I don't want this. But something needs to be done to help fix this. There is no reason give guys enough money to buy and Audi in college, but pretending that you've done enough by offering a scholarship when obviously impropriety is rampant is ignorant and irresponsible. I liken it to people who don't believe in teaching their children about birth control and think abstinence is the only form of sex education a child should get. Of course no one wants their kids having lots of sex at a young age, but taking the hardline, all-or-nothing stance does far less to combat the problem then accepting that it's going to happen anyway and the best thing you can do is make sure they are fully informed of all the risks and know about using protection, etc. Colleges pretending that they have fulfilled their end of the bargain by offering a scholarship and then washing their hands of any future consequences is irresponsible. They are silent collaborators in a broken system. I'm not trying to coerce them into bribing their athletes to stay away from "improper" money, nor am I absolving an athlete who takes something from a booster. I just think that there needs to be a little give here and that it would go a long way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 That's the difference between a high school grad and a college grad's lifetime earning potential. "The report titled "The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings" (.pdf) reveals that over an adult's working life, high school graduates can expect, on average, to earn $1.2 million; those with a bachelor's degree, $2.1 million; and people with a master's degree, $2.5 million." http://usgovinfo.abo...andearnings.htm So these student athletes are (potentially) getting $900,000+tuition+room+board. And that's not good enough?" And just like Fez's example, that analysis does not factor in the star athlete's contribution to that math. The only reason that the school is able to offer a "free ride" is because those players earn it on the field and then some. These players are not allowed to make a living at their chosen profession and set their wage rate. Assigning a hypothetical lifetime earning potential of college grads vs high school grads is irrelevant in these cases because most of their time in college is spent perfecting another skill than academics. How would the lifetime earnings analysis look if you compared a high school graduate with a college graduate with a 1.0 GPA? I doubt that the differential would be too high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 A small stipend is needed. For those of you who think that the student atheletes (this case football players) make a lot or get enough in return for their services in the form of tuition+room+board, you're sadly misguided. Those of you that have played the game at a high level know exactly how much time is needed in practice, film room, working out, etc. These athletes dont have the time to do all of that, do their studies, AND work for spending $$ Another student can at least have a part time job for spending $$. This is where the stipend is needed. If nothing else, give them something so they do stay away from agents and such. Why the hell do you think that happens? Because they have $$?? No, it's because they don't. I wont argue that these student athletes aren't getting a free education, etc, but compare them to another scholarship earning student. What does a student with a full ride Academic scholarship do for a school? How much $$ is he/she bringing in? The Academic scholarship student gets the same education, but they don't bring the $$ like student athletes bring in. This is big, BIG business people. And, since it's a business, you can be rest assured that people (not students) are raking in TONS of loot. I don't think that student athletes need to be paid large sums of $$, but a stipend is warranted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Most D1 football programs are not only self sustaining, but also add money to the rest of the athletic dept (including scholarships for kids who will graduate and take advantage of the opportunity) and the rest of the school. Interestingly, very few D1 football programs make enough money to cover the entire athletic program, let alone give any money back to the schools. Athletic departments find ways to make sure that money stays within the loop. The great unmeasured benefit is the degree to which big-time athletics increase alumni giving. A small stipend is needed. For those of you who think that the student atheletes (this case football players) make a lot or get enough in return for their services in the form of tuition+room+board, you're sadly misguided. Those of you that have played the game at a high level know exactly how much time is needed in practice, film room, working out, etc. These athletes dont have the time to do all of that, do their studies, AND work for spending $$ Another student can at least have a part time job for spending $$. This is where the stipend is needed. If nothing else, give them something so they do stay away from agents and such. Why the hell do you think that happens? Because they have $$?? No, it's because they don't. I wont argue that these student athletes aren't getting a free education, etc, but compare them to another scholarship earning student. What does a student with a full ride Academic scholarship do for a school? How much $$ is he/she bringing in? The Academic scholarship student gets the same education, but they don't bring the $$ like student athletes bring in. This is big, BIG business people. And, since it's a business, you can be rest assured that people (not students) are raking in TONS of loot. I don't think that student athletes need to be paid large sums of $$, but a stipend is warranted. I think two simple reforms would balance the scales. One is a small living stipend for athletes, which would remove the "he can't even fly home for christmas" issue. The other would be for schools to guarantee the student free tuition for an extended period after completion of his eligibility (say, six years total--two years after completion of eligibility), which would help deal with the problem that student-athletes have a hard time carrying full academic loads during their seasons. It would not be unlimited (one has to put some responsibility back on the student) but it would cut down on the number of students who are simply cut loose after their eligibility is up. Edited January 4, 2011 by RJ (not THAT RJ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 I think two simple reforms would balance the scales. One is a small living stipend for athletes, which would remove the "he can't even fly home for christmas" issue. The other would be for schools to guarantee the student free tuition for an extended period after completion of his eligibility (say, six years total--two years after completion of eligibility), which would help deal with the problem that student-athletes have a hard time carrying full academic loads during their seasons. It would not be unlimited (one has to put some responsibility back on the student) but it would cut down on the number of students who are simply cut loose after their eligibility is up. That would go a long way toward giving the players an opportunity to prepare for their future after football or basketball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 That would go a long way toward giving the players an opportunity to prepare for their future after football or basketball That's what I think, and it would allow schools to show that they actually take their educational mission seriously. Whether an athlete takes advantage is up to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Interestingly, very few D1 football programs make enough money to cover the entire athletic program, let alone give any money back to the schools. Athletic departments find ways to make sure that money stays within the loop. The great unmeasured benefit is the degree to which big-time athletics increase alumni giving. Yeah, I didn't say that they cover the entire program, only that they are self sustaining and in most cases give something back to other programs. This in response to a poster who complained about it coming from tax money and student tuition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Well $20,000 is huge to someone living on welfare. Not sure how you did you math but 20 hours per week X 14 weeks per semester X 2 semesters= 20 X 28 =560 hours. That's around $35 per hour. Even at 52 weeks which they are not putting in 20 hours every week of the year, would still work out to $20 per hour. Not sure what your point even is?? Are you saying that's too much or not enough ? Yes an $80,000 tuition gift for 4 years is alot, but without htese kids the schools wouldn't be making millions, If you've already given him $20,000 a year, what's an extra $1000? Make it $21,000 so he has some walking around money. As someone else posted, when people pay money to watch you do a lab, then you're right, giving these kids free tuition is enough. Until then as long as the schools are making millions, giving the kids some walking around money isn't so bad. If things were more reaosnable, maybe there'd be less cheating. "HUGE" amounts of money in the form of tuition? Lets use round numbers and talk just about state colleges $20,000, tuition, room board, books, misc expenses The NCAA says a team can only work a player 20 hrs a week in season or off season. They ALL cheat on that, so it is closer to 30 hrs. For sake of this argument we will go with 20. So, that means they make $10.00 an hour. They could make 8 bucks an hour work study signing people in and out of the rec center while sitting at a desk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 The only problem with opening this can of worms is what about all the athletes in the non-revenue generating sports? Paying only football and basketball players will only open up a situation where they will have their asses sued off and have to end up paying everyone anyway. Paying everyone will lead to massive cancellations of a lot of non-revenue sports programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 5, 2011 Share Posted January 5, 2011 OK, you stay up there on your high horse and look at the world your way. I'll take the realistic approach. Oh, lt's not forget all the schwag from alumni. Just sayin'. I'[ll guarantee all these football/basketball players have more cabbage than I did when I was in school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts