Well, looks like I'll have Saturdays free...

Kawai-chang · #1 10-28-2011, 06:11 AM

I just read tha the NCAA is going to let schools give players $2000 a year for "spending money".

I used to like college football too.

I did a little research on this and found out in 2009, Ohio State was giving their players a "food and housing" stipend of $1300 a month above paying for the academic aspect of the school. Seems to me that's plenty of rent and food for a month, now they are going to get another $2000 per year for, what, food and housing?

I'm going to go root for a D-III school.

RS · #2 10-28-2011, 07:26 AM

I am far from an expert on college football, but I don't necessarily see a problem with this. The big schools make boatloads of money selling football to the masses. No reason not to cut them in, esp. when the colleges mandate their totally inability to earn money for themselves.

J. Crawford · #3 10-28-2011, 07:57 AM

I agree with the idea 100%.

spade2you · #4 10-28-2011, 08:13 AM

I have no problem with this. Between practice, games, and travel, they're putting in a lot of hours and work.

Fat.Mike · #5 10-28-2011, 08:28 AM

Having lived next to a DI practice field... Those boys do put in a lot of work, and $2000 "a year" ain't much.

macaroni tony · #6 10-28-2011, 08:30 AM

It's about time they do something for the players. NCAA works under the guise of being holier-than-thou. When the reality is that they are just a high-profile racket. That's fine, but don't cut out the players (the ones who actually sacrifice their bodies for the entertainment of the masses on the gi-NORMOUS profits you are getting).

BTW, Kawai, you mention Ohio State as an example. What about the hundreds of other D1 schools, including the smaller ones? I'll give you a hint: by and large, they aren't giving a stipend.

Kawai-chang · #7 10-28-2011, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macaroni tony

It's about time they do something for the players. NCAA works under the guise of being holier-than-thou. When the reality is that they are just a high-profile racket. That's fine, but don't cut out the players (the ones who actually sacrifice their bodies for the entertainment of the masses on the gi-NORMOUS profits you are getting).

BTW, Kawai, you mention Ohio State as an example. What about the hundreds of other D1 schools, including the smaller ones? I'll give you a hint: by and large, they aren't giving a stipend.

Tony, I only used OSU because I was having the same debate with one of their fans.

Jhengsman · #8 10-28-2011, 09:42 AM

Its about time the NCAA drop the amateur fiction like the Olympic committee did. Big time High School players are almost pros now

Pilgrim · #9 10-28-2011, 09:48 AM

I strongly support the idea.

It's time that the players who generate millions for the school get paid. They are not only "student athletes", they are entertainers and, as far as I'm concerned, employees of the school. Most of them "work" (practice and train) at least half-time in addition to their school activities.

There are no amateurs in college football. We need to abandon that entire facade. The Olympics have done so, and the NCAA should be next.

Kawai-chang · #10 10-28-2011, 10:00 AM

My issue is that noone seems to think that the price of the "education" matters. These kids have the opportunity to get a free college education, room and board paid, for their efforts on the football field.

macaroni tony · #11 10-28-2011, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kawai-chang

Tony, I only used OSU because I was having the same debate with one of their fans.

All right my bad

macaroni tony · #12 10-28-2011, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilgrim

I strongly support the idea.

It's time that the players who generate millions for the school get paid. They are not only "student athletes", they are entertainers and, as far as I'm concerned, employees of the school. Most of them "work" (practice and train) at least half-time in addition to their school activities.

There are no amateurs in college football. We need to abandon that entire facade. The Olympics have done so, and the NCAA should be next.

That's the way I feel. These guys (top tier college athletes) are getting paid anyway; lets drop the facade and do this thing right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kawai-chang

My issue is that noone seems to think that the price of the "education" matters. These kids have the opportunity to get a free college education, room and board paid, for their efforts on the football field.

I used to be of the same mind. But after a while, the reality of the situation grew on me. There are many people who get academic scholarships, music or performing arts scholarships, or what have you. They get a scholarship based on their future contributions to society. Athletes, they get a scholarship based on their ability to bring more revenue to the school itself. On top of that, they put themselves through heck to get money for that school while they are at school. Non-athletic scholarships; they don't have to do anything but go to school while they are there, just like everybody else.

And lets face it; by and large, the scholarship athletes are not there for an education. They are there to play football, and the education is a by-product. One thing is for sure; the free-ride scholarship is in no way commensurate to the money generated by pro sports (TV deals, merchandise, ticket sales, etcetc...)

nogoodwithnames · #13 10-28-2011, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macaroni tony

I used to be of the same mind. But after a while, the reality of the situation grew on me. There are many people who get academic scholarships, music or performing arts scholarships, or what have you. They get a scholarship based on their future contributions to society. Athletes, they get a scholarship based on their ability to bring more revenue to the school itself. On top of that, they put themselves through heck to get money for that school while they are at school. Non-athletic scholarships; they don't have to do anything but go to school while they are there, just like everybody else.

And lets face it; by and large, the scholarship athletes are not there for an education. They are there to play football, and the education is a by-product. One thing is for sure; the free-ride scholarship is in no way commensurate to the money generated by pro sports (TV deals, merchandise, ticket sales, etcetc...)

Well said. My thoughts exactly.

Sure they're getting a free education, which is nothing to scoff at, but their fulltime job of performing for the football team pretty much eliminates the possibility of supporting themselves through school like everyone else. It's a necessary evil that will hopefully someday end all these stupid NCAA "scandals"

Kawai-chang · #14 10-28-2011, 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nogoodwithnames

Well said. My thoughts exactly.

Sure they're getting a free education, which is nothing to scoff at, but their fulltime job of performing for the football team pretty much eliminates the possibility of supporting themselves through school like everyone else. It's a necessary evil that will hopefully someday end all these stupid NCAA "scandals"

Well, if they're getting free food, lodging, books, and classes, what do they need to work to support?

**jmattbassplaya** · #15 10-28-2011, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kawai-chang

Well, if they're getting free food, lodging, books, and classes, what do they need to work to support?

Well said.

I'm just amazed at how much money sports programs make and how little any of those profits go back to the school to help lower tuition for all students.

macaroni tony · #16 10-28-2011, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kawai-chang

Well, if they're getting free food, lodging, books, and classes, what do they need to work to support?

So are the other scholarship students, and they are not working their butt off physically and using their superhuman talents to make the school tons and tons of more money. The schools thereafter sell their jerseys, and make a lot more money for the NCAA. I don't see how that is much different from exploitation

macaroni tony · #17 10-28-2011, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmattbassplaya

I'm just amazed at how much money sports programs make and how little any of those profits go back to the school to help lower tuition for all students.

A sad reality. The truth of the matter is, no matter how much the NCAA tries to portray itself in a different way, it is nothing more than a very big, very successful business. Nothing wrong with that, but call it like it is IMO

Kawai-chang · #18 10-28-2011, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macaroni tony

So are the other scholarship students, and they are not working their butt off physically and using their superhuman talents to make the school tons and tons of more money. The schools thereafter sell their jerseys, and make a lot more money for the NCAA. I don't see how that is much different from exploitation

NCAA rules specifically say no players name can be on a jersey sold by the school.

As to the other scholarship student, they are working their butt off using their above average intellect.

Exploitation, to me would imply that the athletes don't get anything.

Funky Ghost · #19 10-28-2011, 11:41 AM

Take the name "sports" out of it and call it "advertising". It's a business model. The advertise programs that meet on fields, in gyms and on tracks are marketing. The better the advertising, the better the draw of customers (students). You pay for advertising in the regular business world, why should this be any different. I suppose you could call them interns, but the fact remains that they do the work, they should share in the profits.
Dolly Dr. and Mike the mechanic are not part of the visibility factor, so they get a scholarship and they get their education. The elite minds already have a way in and are making choices on what the best program is for their skill set. The other 98% of the student body is there because of regional availability, marketing or weather.

Pilgrim · #20 10-28-2011, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kawai-chang

My issue is that noone seems to think that the price of the "education" matters. These kids have the opportunity to get a free college education, room and board paid, for their efforts on the football field.

The cost of those items is peanuts compared to what they generate for the institution. Sports are not only participatory, as noted above, they are advertising for the institution.