• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

This completely changed my view...

grizpsych

Well-known member
on paying college players. F the NCAA! (Yes, the Daily Show. You should watch it.)

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/bwjj0i/sports-disparity" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
I watched this earlier today. Really good and funny. I don't think players should necessarily get paid, but the ncaa needs to address player requests/demands and loosen up the rules. Change is surely coming, and has been for several years. And now the NW ruling is moving things along a bit faster. The ncaa seems to have finally woken up. The ncaa is going to lose some of the pending lawsuits too, is my guess.

I think the changes and loosening of the ncaa rules may help UM get some relief from the ncaa sanctions, or could. However, I have little or no confidence in UM's administration is using the best strategy to get this done.
 
I waffle back and forth on this one. My biggest concern about paying NCAA athletes is the haves vs the have-nots situation. I could foresee some of the haves like Texas, Ohio State, etc offering way more pay than some of the other institutions that don't have the cash to compete with them. But yes, the NCAA really needs to take a look at the whole concept of amateur college sports and make some major changes. Between academics and athletics, a student athlete basically has two full time jobs. It's a lot of work. A full ride athlete shouldn't go to bed hungry. I sort of think that the big conferences (the haves) aren't all that far from up and leaving the NCAA.

My son is a student athlete and I thought about that issue last fall when he called and told me he was out of money on his meal card. It took me about 10 minutes to load a couple hundred bucks onto his meal card, but I realized at the time that some people might not be able to do that for their kids. It just doesn't seem right to me.
 
OldtiredGRiz said:
I waffle back and forth on this one. My biggest concern about paying NCAA athletes is the haves vs the have-nots situation. I could foresee some of the haves like Texas, Ohio State, etc offering way more pay than some of the other institutions that don't have the cash to compete with them. But yes, the NCAA really needs to take a look at the whole concept of amateur college sports and make some major changes. Between academics and athletics, a student athlete basically has two full time jobs. It's a lot of work. A full ride athlete shouldn't go to bed hungry. I sort of think that the big conferences (the haves) aren't all that far from up and leaving the NCAA.

My son is a student athlete and I thought about that issue last fall when he called and told me he was out of money on his meal card. It took me about 10 minutes to load a couple hundred bucks onto his meal card, but I realized at the time that some people might not be able to do that for their kids. It just doesn't seem right to me.

You hit the nail on the head. I sent two to out of State schools on athletic scholarships (full ride) and it frankly cost me a whole lot more for those kids than the others especially the two on academic scholarships. Little things even like spending money, transportation, oh yeah the meal card. The athletes couldn't work, (even in the summer) they already had a full time job............ I'm not so sure but we lose some great athletes at every level because they can't afford school on a full ride............ Now we can't even buy 'em a decent meal once in a while
 
OldtiredGRiz said:
I waffle back and forth on this one. My biggest concern about paying NCAA athletes is the haves vs the have-nots situation. I could foresee some of the haves like Texas, Ohio State, etc offering way more pay than some of the other institutions that don't have the cash to compete with them. But yes, the NCAA really needs to take a look at the whole concept of amateur college sports and make some major changes. Between academics and athletics, a student athlete basically has two full time jobs. It's a lot of work. A full ride athlete shouldn't go to bed hungry. I sort of think that the big conferences (the haves) aren't all that far from up and leaving the NCAA.

My son is a student athlete and I thought about that issue last fall when he called and told me he was out of money on his meal card. It took me about 10 minutes to load a couple hundred bucks onto his meal card, but I realized at the time that some people might not be able to do that for their kids. It just doesn't seem right to me.

Great post. There are times and places for rules but the level of oversight is ridiculous. While some may take advantage (in a pay-for structure) for personal gain most are currently taken advantage of.
 
At schools without training tables, there are football players at almost every school who don't have enough money to eat fully and properly--especially the bigger guys who are trying to gain/keep on weight. Some of the big guys are encouraged to eat an astounding amount of food/calories--like 4 or 5 times as much as a normal not small person.

And modern day sports are so time demanding, and year round, that it's very difficult to have a part-time or summer job to make some money.
 
1,000,000,000 seems like you should be able to shell out a few dollars to keep your gladiators fed to play another round.......it is a small cost to put on the show to make that big money.....besides if they get injured and are unable to complete their degree (say due to head injuries, i know it is arbitrary but it happens) at least you don't have to support them for a lifetime (like a degree and a job would be able to do if they were able to complete or if they had even greater aspirations and wanted to get a masters or phd........ scholarships do not beyond a 4 yr degree).
so as a business setting limits and giving up on them due to injury is another win for corporate america.....discard the broken and replace with another tool to keep the masses induced....
heavy........but not far from the truth.....tongue and cheek...no disrespect to the players...i was one once....still am for but in a different capacity.....worker bee for the corporate queen.
it goes beyond a meal card in reality....it is part of a much greater system than the ncaa....it is a business whose performers do not get paid....there redemption is gratification to play the game (hopefully to get a 4 year degree if all goes well) and hopes to play in pro sports
 
tnt said:
OldtiredGRiz said:
I waffle back and forth on this one. My biggest concern about paying NCAA athletes is the haves vs the have-nots situation. I could foresee some of the haves like Texas, Ohio State, etc offering way more pay than some of the other institutions that don't have the cash to compete with them. But yes, the NCAA really needs to take a look at the whole concept of amateur college sports and make some major changes. Between academics and athletics, a student athlete basically has two full time jobs. It's a lot of work. A full ride athlete shouldn't go to bed hungry. I sort of think that the big conferences (the haves) aren't all that far from up and leaving the NCAA.

My son is a student athlete and I thought about that issue last fall when he called and told me he was out of money on his meal card. It took me about 10 minutes to load a couple hundred bucks onto his meal card, but I realized at the time that some people might not be able to do that for their kids. It just doesn't seem right to me.

You hit the nail on the head. I sent two to out of State schools on athletic scholarships (full ride) and it frankly cost me a whole lot more for those kids than the others especially the two on academic scholarships. Little things even like spending money, transportation, oh yeah the meal card. The athletes couldn't work, (even in the summer) they already had a full time job............ I'm not so sure but we lose some great athletes at every level because they can't afford school on a full ride............ Now we can't even buy 'em a decent meal once in a while

F'n A, how many kids do you have?
 
I don't think the players forming some type of organization to help protect them selves is a bad idea. I do think if it comes down to getting some kind of paid compensation other than scholarships then it will be the beginning of the end as we know it for college sports. Scholarships are the gateway for many student athletes to get an education that otherwise may not happen due to finances. As we all know only the fewest percent of players are ever able to make a career after college in their given sport so getting a degree should be the focus and I bet most athletes do get that. If they are good enough and fortunate enough to go on to the next level than good for them, I will enjoy watching them on Sundays.
What does kind of piss me off a bit is when a student athlete who uses three years of his scholarship and then enters the draft to make millions, leaving some other student on the street because there were not enough scholarships to go around and the guy that did get one just wasted it. No one in that situation wins other than the drafted. If an athlete enters the draft before graduation then either he or the team that drafts him should pay back the university for those lost years. I know this may sound like I support the NCAA but that is not at all true. They also need to get their head out of their ass and stop the bullshit stipulations imposed on the students. It should not be a federal crime to give a guy a burger if he has not eaten and short on cash. He should also be able to get a job if he needs or wants too.
There is no doubt the NCAA is all about the money. There is no doubt that the reset button needs to be pushed and many issues addressed.
 
I really don't have a strong view one way or the other, but getting a free four year college education, board and room, etc., and then bitching about it seems...

From Visible Origami:
There’s an old joke; a man approaches a beautiful woman and he asks her if she will go to bed with him for a million dollars. She assures him that she will. He then asks her if she will go to bed with him for $10.00, with a shocked retort she replies, “Absolutely not, what do you think I am?” He replies, “We’ve already established that, now we’re just dickering about the price.”

They say everyone has their price. I suppose in most every case I would have to agree.
 
its funny how many people seem to thing that someone's elses' time is not worth much but there time is worth gold. the amount of time and money these students make for their schools
 
grizare#1 said:
What does kind of piss me off a bit is when a student athlete who uses three years of his scholarship and then enters the draft to make millions, leaving some other student on the street because there were not enough scholarships to go around and the guy that did get one just wasted it. No one in that situation wins other than the drafted. If an athlete enters the draft before graduation then either he or the team that drafts him should pay back the university for those lost years.
This "logic" just lost me. If the guy was there for three years and was productive enough to earn millions after his junior year, he must have contributed enough to justify his schollie. Unlikely there was a line of equally skilled players not getting schollies.
 
grizzpaw said:
its funny how many people seem to thing that someone's elses' time is not worth much but there time is worth gold. the amount of time and money these students make for their schools
Point lost to illiteracy.
 
Have your scholarship yanked 'cause of concussions and you can no longer participate in the game you love.

Paid the players! Insure them! Guarantee their scholarships! Do something besides using them like livestock!

Personally, I think former collegiate and professional athletes should sue the NCAA and universities. :twisted:
 
There IS something untoward about creating these huge bureaucracies, college presidents getting big slush funds out of athletics for their personal campus projects, high salaries to coaches and ADs, lots of bling accruing to a successful school and ... all on the backs, literally, of a bunch of kids who just want to play the game.
 
I'm not so sure players should be paid (beyond scholarships), but it is completely hypocritical for the ncaa (whose members are the schools, which control the ncaa) to not allow players to make some extra money and get some benefits (like so-called extra benefits).

Schools can make millions but players can't go to someone's house for dinner, or be taken out to dinner? Schools can make money selling players' jerseys, but the player doesn't get any of the income and can't sell his own jersey? How hypocritical is that.

Scholarships ought to cover spending money, and ought to be big enough for a player to eat all he wants/needs to eat.
 
I share the concerns over cutting players a paycheck. Recruiting might get even more corrupted, and the landscape even more lopsided. Line drawing would also be an issue because the U of Idaho punter, though very busy, probably doesn't bring in much revenue. Does he get the same pay as Jameis Winston?

Accordingly, wouldn't a fair solution be to not outright pay players, but, as PR mentioned, permit them to make money on the side based on their athletic abilities? If a dude wants to go do a TV ad for Wilkins Hyundai and Subaru, let him get paid for it. You won't have the line drawing issues because Billy Wilkins of Wilkins Hyundai and Subaru doesn't want the punter in his ad, he wants the QB.

Let them eat what they can kill.
 
The entire collegiate game has become a victim of big money, which is now what drives every aspect of our lives in America. The fact that Kentucky, starting 5 "guns-for-hire" freshman basketball players was able to get to the NC game was an indication of what a joke college sports has become.

The old adage "follow the money" could not be more appropriate here.

If college athletes start getting paid for their services, the rich will only get richer. No way a second tier team like Boise State will ever again compete with the big money teams.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
tnt said:
OldtiredGRiz said:
I waffle back and forth on this one. My biggest concern about paying NCAA athletes is the haves vs the have-nots situation. I could foresee some of the haves like Texas, Ohio State, etc offering way more pay than some of the other institutions that don't have the cash to compete with them. But yes, the NCAA really needs to take a look at the whole concept of amateur college sports and make some major changes. Between academics and athletics, a student athlete basically has two full time jobs. It's a lot of work. A full ride athlete shouldn't go to bed hungry. I sort of think that the big conferences (the haves) aren't all that far from up and leaving the NCAA.

My son is a student athlete and I thought about that issue last fall when he called and told me he was out of money on his meal card. It took me about 10 minutes to load a couple hundred bucks onto his meal card, but I realized at the time that some people might not be able to do that for their kids. It just doesn't seem right to me.

You hit the nail on the head. I sent two to out of State schools on athletic scholarships (full ride) and it frankly cost me a whole lot more for those kids than the others especially the two on academic scholarships. Little things even like spending money, transportation, oh yeah the meal card. The athletes couldn't work, (even in the summer) they already had a full time job............ I'm not so sure but we lose some great athletes at every level because they can't afford school on a full ride............ Now we can't even buy 'em a decent meal once in a while

F'n A, how many kids do you have?

9 we that we adopted......
 
CDAGRIZ said:
I share the concerns over cutting players a paycheck. Recruiting might get even more corrupted, and the landscape even more lopsided. Line drawing would also be an issue because the U of Idaho punter, though very busy, probably doesn't bring in much revenue. Does he get the same pay as Jameis Winston?

Accordingly, wouldn't a fair solution be to not outright pay players, but, as PR mentioned, permit them to make money on the side based on their athletic abilities? If a dude wants to go do a TV ad for Wilkins Hyundai and Subaru, let him get paid for it. You won't have the line drawing issues because Billy Wilkins of Wilkins Hyundai and Subaru doesn't want the punter in his ad, he wants the QB.

Let them eat what they can kill.

I tend to agree, the only problem is only a few stars will benefit, the third string tackle not so much. The same with getting a cut from jersey sales, perhaps this money could be pooled so all team members can get some reasonable pocket money.

There are a couple elephants in the room. Very few schools are revenue positive with their athletic programs other than football and men's hoops, as we all know they subsidize the other sports. The other is Title IX. If pocket money is given to football players it will have to be given to gymnasts, swim teams, track teams, field hockey teams, etc, etc . Title IX is NOT going anywhere .

I think the NCAA is an organization that has far to much power and has no checks on that power. They do however use the revenue they get to stage lower level championships (like FCS, D2 and D3). Almost all of the NCAA revenue comes from March Madness and they spend most it on staging championships in multiple sports. I think they had an operating surplus of 70 million last year on 770 million in revenue (March Madness money). Paying a twit like Emmert 1.5 mill is ridiculous and I'd guess their overhead is bloated like any other bureaucracy.

I'd hate to see the loss of schollies, partial in many cases for minor sports that help kids get an education if pay for play becomes the norm. I could see where the big dogs tell the NCAA to piss off and going their own way. That would be a mistake by the big boys. People watch March Madness to root for upsets, particularly casual fans.

If the big dogs decide to opt out the value of hoops tanks and CBS says no thanks and a lot of dough goes away.

It will be interesting how this plays out.
 
Back
Top