How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

[goon]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

1 & 5 - Pretty much what SF said.
2. Does the cost of that education that the athlete receives prevent universities and all those other groups from making money? If the answer is no, then there is still extra revenue floating out there getting other people rich. Why shouldn't athletes get a cut.
3. I believe you may be overstating the travel arrangements, but I could be wrong.
4. The current state of the NCAA does nothing to diminish education? Lol.

I thank you for the response. I don't agree with most of it, but at least there was some thought behind it.

please clarify your point. is it that only high profile revenue sports should pay those athletes but nothing for the non revenue sports athletes?

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

So you do have comprehension problems. So you obviously don't understand the value and cost of those scholarships. Some of those programs kids if they wanted could take advantage of a free education at a quality school. They know the deal. Some of those schools value of the scholarships are probably more then some of us make in a year.

Also again nobody forces them to go to college. Why do you make it seem like they are getting the worst deal in the history of bad deals? They know how it works and chose to go. None of us are saying the ncaa is great and shouldn't change. They could make plenty of changes but why is it so bad others make money from it? So that money uconn made from the ncaa you don't think any of that money goes back to the students in other ways or to support non revenue students athletes or only revenue sports should they get paid? You haven't made that clear? have you seen some of the practice facilities and training places they get to use? You probably despise bill gates for being a billionaire when his software engineers make pocket change in comparison.

Its the students ***** choice if they want to ***** go to class and take their ******* education seriously so don't act like they are being forced in to college with no benefits to them.

Nobody forces them to go to college. However, if the end goal is going pro, which it is for many athletes, going to college is about the only option they have, and much better than any secondary option. Why is that? Because pro sports work with the NCAA (if you don't think the NCAA lobbies to professional leagues or puts pressure on them, you are insane) to essentially force an athlete to make one choice with the rules that are in place. I think if we are going to continue to use this system (I'm more for what MD was talking about in his post), that the athletes should at least share the profits.

By the way, you didn't give one good reason why they should share profits. But the nonsensical tangent about me not liking Bill Gates really added a lot to the discussion. I may prefer Macs, but I have nothing against Mr. Gates. He's one of the most charitable people alive and seems like a good dude. But thanks for driving home your point with further nonsense.

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

please clarify your point. is it that only high profile revenue sports should pay those athletes but nothing for the non revenue sports athletes?

I have zero issue with this, but would add some type of revenue sharing for TV/merchandise. Perhaps TV money would go by conference. The SEC signs a $500 million contract with ESPN to broadcast football games? 50% of that money each year goes to the football players in the SEC. And then each school gives a % of merchandise money to athletes and spread it across all sports.

Revenue sports should get a share of the revenue (TV deals, tickets, etc.) and all sports should get a % merchandise.

I don't think that's perfect, but I think it's a wonderful starting point.

[jackdaniel]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

These two statements are interesting so close together. To me, accepting something as the norm, i.e. it is the way it is, is the same thing as saying it's okay.

Again you assume,I'm just saying I had nothing to do with it bcomming the way it is now,and am powerless to change it even if i don't accept it.....big difference to saying I'm OK with it.There's a lot of things people accept,but aren't necessarily "OK" with it(i.e. fond,happy). You're not related to ex-President Clinton are you?

[OldHare]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

As we look to find the balance of student athlete with college athletics and the potential of a paycheck for the student athlete, the notion of collge athletics fades and another semi-pro league should evolve. That would remove the sports from the college arena. Pay the young athletes accordingly. Some may recall the USFL for football and the ABA for basketball. The paychecks were as big or bigger than their counterparts when some of the big stars were captured to play the smaller venues with less talented teammates. Basketball's D league is as close as you might get for a current analogy. The current idea of paying college athletes appears to be variation of the earlier attempts that tried to displace the more successful pro leagues. However, now it would be the colleges bankrolling the effort to make these players ready for the chance at the big game instead a D league. The D league will pay less than $50K and provide transportation. Some of the universities may charge $50K for a year of college expenses and provide transportation and a few meals. If you should graduate from college and gain employment in your chosen field, do you start at the big corner office with the same pay as someone who has been there 20 years or do you get something equivalent to D league pay or maybe play at the Bucks for $500K or go to Europe and live and work abroad to gain more experience to have a shot at the big league? Some of the notions that a young athlete has earned a share of something because he is a member of a team is a bit entitled. There are choices other than college athletics. The success of the NCAA is a bit mind boggling for basketball and football earning money for the institutions. The spread the wealth approach will not solve all the student athlete money problems with a few dollars over the scholarship. I would endorse that extra money from the athletic program be funneled back to the academic environment of a college rather than do a profit sharing for the student athletes. There is a free agency out there for the athletes that might be good enough to have that corner office and I would support their decision to avoid the slavery of a college campus.

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Again you assume,I'm just saying I had nothing to do with it bcomming the way it is now,and am powerless to change it even if i don't accept it.....big difference to saying I'm OK with it.There's a lot of things people accept,but aren't necessarily "OK" with it(i.e. fond,happy). You're not related to ex-President Clinton are you?

I'm not assuming. I understand the point you are trying to make, and I disagree with it.

[goon]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Nobody forces them to go to college. However, if the end goal is going pro, which it is for many athletes, going to college is about the only option they have, and much better than any secondary option. Why is that? Because pro sports work with the NCAA (if you don't think the NCAA lobbies to professional leagues or puts pressure on them, you are insane) to essentially force an athlete to make one choice with the rules that are in place. I think if we are going to continue to use this system (I'm more for what MD was talking about in his post), that the athletes should at least share the profits.

By the way, you didn't give one good reason why they should share profits. But the nonsensical tangent about me not liking Bill Gates really added a lot to the discussion. I may prefer Macs, but I have nothing against Mr. Gates. He's one of the most charitable people alive and seems like a good dude. But thanks for driving home your point with further nonsense.

Idon’t think they should share profits or pay some students more just depending on the sport they play. I am all for finding better ways for the NCAA to use the money it gets, but acting like its lining the pocket of just a few people without doing anything else good is just insane. What that would do would just make bigger TV contracts, make tickets more expensive, charge students fees more for attending games etc. Because those who profit from it are not going to share their piece of the pie. I do think there are other ways to improve college sports though. So would you be happy if no one profited from college sports?

I don’t get the reason for why students who play revenue sports deserve something or more over students who don’t play a revenue sport. They put in just as much for practice, time and school work etc so the reason that revenue sports athletes inherently should profit from that sport while others should get less or not get a slice of the pie is mind boggling.

It’s really pretty simple, the students who think they should get paid or are unhappy with it should take their argument to the pro sports leagues that they find their leagues are not fair to allow them in without certain restrictions like age etc. It would be wise of those leagues to start with some better development leagues. Baseball has a great minor system that you can go into right out of high school and when you get to the pro level your skills are better and ready for that high quality of league. Basketball does somewhat with the D league which could lower its age to 18 which i think is the same as the nba at 19. That way they are putting guys into the league who are ready and developed enough outside of the NBA so they actually are putting a better product on the floor. Football also, could easily do a something as a development league or minor league system that is for 18-20 year olds who don’t want college but not skilled or developed enough for the NFL, but to act like they NCAA with all its issues has been screwing over the athletes is not completely true. Ncaa could allow easier rules for players to transfer, allow a simple stipend for living expenses which would need to be documented or something around like an expense report sheet where players are using that money for food and living expenses.

The NCAA has issues, but just giving some SEC football players money or big 10 or ACC basketball players money because there are big TV contracts that others actually profit from just seems like a great way to kill college athletics.

try making a point with out trying to putdown others for once and how could an actual sharing revenue work amongst the team and sports of certain colleges? its really not that simple. do the Qb for every football team make more, or the player with the best stats, or only those who are going to go to the NFL, how much of a cut would the swimming and diving team get and how would they share it? Its just another system that would have just as many horrible inherent issues in it.

[slosho]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Are you talking about the part of SDSU student tuition that goes to an activity ticket, or is there something else? I'm not fully informed on how that works, so if you (or someone) could explain it further that would be excellent.

I was actually referring to the the mandatory Activity fee. and I am aware that the student has a choice to attend events for free, but I know some do not want to, yet have to pay.

[KUlawJack]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Idon’t think they should share profits or pay some students more just depending on the sport they play. I am all for finding better ways for the NCAA to use the money it gets, but acting like its lining the pocket of just a few people without doing anything else good is just insane. What that would do would just make bigger TV contracts, make tickets more expensive, charge students fees more for attending games etc. Because those who profit from it are not going to share their piece of the pie. I do think there are other ways to improve college sports though. So would you be happy if no one profited from college sports?

I don’t get the reason for why students who play revenue sports deserve something or more over students who don’t play a revenue sport. They put in just as much for practice, time and school work etc so the reason that revenue sports athletes inherently should profit from that sport while others should get less or not get a slice of the pie is mind boggling.

It’s really pretty simple, the students who think they should get paid or are unhappy with it should take their argument to the pro sports leagues that they find their leagues are not fair to allow them in without certain restrictions like age etc. It would be wise of those leagues to start with some better development leagues. Baseball has a great minor system that you can go into right out of high school and when you get to the pro level your skills are better and ready for that high quality of league. Basketball does somewhat with the D league which could lower its age to 18 which i think is the same as the nba at 19. That way they are putting guys into the league who are ready and developed enough outside of the NBA so they actually are putting a better product on the floor. Football also, could easily do a something as a development league or minor league system that is for 18-20 year olds who don’t want college but not skilled or developed enough for the NFL, but to act like they NCAA with all its issues has been screwing over the athletes is not completely true. Ncaa could allow easier rules for players to transfer, allow a simple stipend for living expenses which would need to be documented or something around like an expense report sheet where players are using that money for food and living expenses.

The NCAA has issues, but just giving some SEC football players money or big 10 or ACC basketball players money because there are big TV contracts that others actually profit from just seems like a great way to kill college athletics.

try making a point with out trying to putdown others for once and how could an actual sharing revenue work amongst the team and sports of certain colleges? its really not that simple. do the Qb for every football team make more, or the player with the best stats, or only those who are going to go to the NFL, how much of a cut would the swimming and diving team get and how would they share it? Its just another system that would have just as many horrible inherent issues in it.

Because they don't generate revenue for the university - it is the players for those revenue sports that people pay money to see. You don't think Johnny Manziel had a tad more value to Texas A&M than the third-string women's tennis player? A&M built a huge addition to their stadium on the back Manziel and earned millions in revenue off of him. That is the reason for some profit sharing model for revenue sports and not others. There is inherent value in the revenue participants that does not exist in non-revenue participants. But for the existence of football, women's tennis doesn't exist at A&M. (I don't even know if it does, just a hypothetical).

I don't even know which side of the fence I fall on with this issue. And I'm not saying I would agree with only sharing with the revenue sports participants, but the argument for sharing with some and not others in the profits is pretty clear.

[goon]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Because they don't generate revenue for the university - it is the players for the those revenue sports that people pay money to see. You don't think Johnny Manziel had a tad more value to Texas A&M than the third-string women's tennis player? A&M built a huge addition to their stadium on the back Manziel and earned millions in revenue off of him. That is the reason for some profit sharing model for revenue sports and not others. There is inherent value in the revenue participants that does not exist in non-revenue participants. But for the existence of football, women's tennis doesn't exist at A&M. (I don't even know if it does, just a hypothetical).

I don't even know which side of the fence I fall on with this issue, but the argument for sharing with some and not others in the profits is pretty clear.

I get that point, but just saying depending on your sport or how high profile an athlete shouldnt get more then the back up center on the team IMHO. so certain players on certain teams deserve it but a walk on football player is no different then a womens tennis player when it comes to value added to the school. So how to pick and choose which players on what teams deserves money beceause they are a bigger factor in producing revenue seems like am impossible thing to calculate. Is Maziel worth 5K a semester, or 25K? is the starting center work how much more then his back up? I dont think its just as simple as some athletes produce more then others in revenue so they deserve to get paid more then others. It just doesn't add up to me.

[TK22867]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

The NCAA has issues, but just giving some SEC football players money or big 10 or ACC basketball players money because there are big TV contracts that others actually profit from just seems like a great way to kill college athletics.

The "payment" to athletes would have to be equal across the board. Otherwise, you are correct, college athletics will be finished. It would be the equivalent of free agency in pro sports with athletes going to the top schools that would pay the most based on the revenue generated by TV contracts, etc.

[KUlawJack]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

I get that point, but just saying depending on your sport or how high profile an athlete shouldnt get more then the back up center on the team IMHO. so certain players on certain teams deserve it but a walk on football player is no different then a womens tennis player when it comes to value added to the school. So how to pick and choose which players on what teams deserves money beceause they are a bigger factor in producing revenue seems like am impossible thing to calculate. Is Maziel worth 5K a semester, or 25K? is the starting center work how much more then his back up? I dont think its just as simple as some athletes produce more then others in revenue so they deserve to get paid more then others. It just doesn't add up to me.

I think someone mentioned this already, but it may not be sharing revenues that is the right answer. It may be allowing the player the ability to use his own likeness to profit. As we all well know, the NCAA and the institutions do that, so the player should be allowed to do so as well. That model may be more workable within the confines of the current structure of the NCAA, despite Mark Emmert being a colossal disgrace of a leader. Seems rather simple to me.

[RabbitObsessed]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

I was actually referring to the the mandatory Activity fee. and I am aware that the student has a choice to attend events for free, but I know some do not want to, yet have to pay.

Yeah that's what I thought you were talking about. I actually don't like the activity ticket being forced upon all students, but I understand why it's done. And I'm obviously someone who took advantage of it.

[OldHare]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Because they don't generate revenue for the university - it is the players for those revenue sports that people pay money to see. You don't think Johnny Manziel had a tad more value to Texas A&M than the third-string women's tennis player? A&M built a huge addition to their stadium on the back Manziel and earned millions in revenue off of him. That is the reason for some profit sharing model for revenue sports and not others. There is inherent value in the revenue participants that does not exist in non-revenue participants. But for the existence of football, women's tennis doesn't exist at A&M. (I don't even know if it does, just a hypothetical).

I don't even know which side of the fence I fall on with this issue. And I'm not saying I would agree with only sharing with the revenue sports participants, but the argument for sharing with some and not others in the profits is pretty clear.

Without Texas A & M as a viable institution, Johnny does not play, excel, and move to a multi-million dollar contract in the NFL. He can even do that without staying 4 years and getting a degree.

[jackmd]

Re: How long until Student-athletes become Athlete-students & get paid?

Without Texas A & M as a viable institution, Johnny does not play, excel, and move to a multi-million dollar contract in the NFL. He can even do that without staying 4 years and getting a degree.

Doesn't give the NCAA the right to exploit a player for the profit of many that have nothing to do with Texas A&M. I love watching these athletes compete. I am not for unionization. I am for paying a reasonable amount of money to student athletes on scholarship. I have no idea what is reasonable. If the institutions and NCAA can make money using a players name or likeness the athlete should be allowed to do the same.

This isn't about the fans or the institutions. This is about athletes and the restrain placed upon them by an organization that seems to be in place simply to make money at the expense of and while exploiting student athletes. All of this is coming about as a consequence of Ed O'Bannon's lawsuit against the NCAA.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/col...eeds-to-trial/

I'm not saying this would never have happened in the future, it happening now because of this. All the philosophical arguments and vitriol expressed in posts on this forum and elsewhere are moot points for the most part. RO is right, except for the student athletes being exploited the rest of us want NOTHING TO CHANGE. That is equivalent to being okay with exploitation by CBC, ESPN, the NCAA and StubHub (I hate those guys), etc......

It may be fun and interesting to discuss the fairness of paying marquis guys, revenue sports, the value of an education, etc.... None of that really matters. If the judge and jury find in favor of O'Bannon or players are allowed to unionize things are going to change in a major way.