NCAA tops $1 billion in revenue

And this is just the NCAA, never mind the individual schools’ revenue.

You wonder why there’s a push to pay athletes? This, and the mess around the agents/shoe companies/college basketball. Money, money everywhere, and it only gets to the players who generate it under the table.

<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.espn.com/college-sports/stor … enue-first”>http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/22678988/ncaa-tops-1-billion-revenue-first</LINK_TEXT>

I’m just so anti paying players.

They are already getting a full ride scholarship. I’m not sure why they don’t understand and appreciate that.

If you pay the football players, you then have to pay every student athlete. Then you have to pay them equally. Just seems like a nightmare.

At the end of the day they are not forced to play a college sport, none of us were. The few that get the opportunity are privileged to get the opportunity to play, and therefor walk away anytime they feel they are being done wrong.

D1 players are treated like kings… trust me. It’s just a level of entitlement that is drastically increasing.

Give them some semesterly stipends to help with groceries and what not, but this whole pay to play thing is absurd.

Now should the NCAA hand some of that money back over to the producers? (Schools)

I think so. That way every school can have academic centers like ours, and other facilities that I think students are lucky to have.

Replace players with “musicians” or “website builders” and see if if makes sense. I don’t think it does. So what if they get a scholarship? Lots of people get scholarships. I got one. Didn’t keep me from getting paid to do something while I was in school. You gonna stop a drummer in the UA band, who is on a music scholarship, from playing in a band on Dickson Street on Friday nights? No? Then why is being an athlete different?

I assume you have or had a job at some point in your life. You expected to get paid, and you expected to get more than tuition, books, room and board. Being a college athlete is a full-time job. Maybe you’re the boss now and other people work for you. You don’t expect them to do what you want them to do without paying their wages. Is that an “entitlement” to want to be paid for the full-time work that you do?

Got news for you. The “producers” aren’t the schools. Schools aren’t generating squat without product, and the product is the players.

I’m liking the Olympic model more and more. The schools won’t dish out any more than they are now, but the kids are free to seek outside income, just as I was 40 years ago. It didn’t ruin the Olympics when high jumpers or skiers could be paid openly, and it won’t ruin college sports either. If the shoe companies want to continue paying point guards or wide receivers, fine. Let’s just get it out from under the table. The Olympic model also avoids Title IX issues. The female diver gets the same thing from the school as the power forward, and if she can figure out a way to get an endorsement or some money on the side, more power to her.

Allowing the players to seek employment outside of their sport wouldn’t be the NCAA actually paying them though. It would be them being allowed to market their own name. I’m by against that as long as it doesn’t become a complete distraction, should probably have limits.

You still run into the problem of everyone wanting to get the exact same treatment these days regardless of if their product is the same level as the others. So then if a basketball player is making six figures, what about the kid on the swim team?

But, as to the NCAA paying them, to me they would have to set it up like an actual employment contract. Require them to stay for 4 years and get their degree, or breach of contract has to pay the money back. There’s also this idea of a pension set up for kids who stay four years and get their degree.

Those are more reasonable.

But as to the NCAA dishing out checks to (football alone) nearly 11000 (FBS and Scholarship only. That number skyrockets when you add D2, and all other sports.
Do you pay the walk ons?

There’s to much thinking with the heart and not enough with the head these days.

In reply to a question you asked.

I did actually play college football for 3 years at LaTech. I know what it’s like to be a student athlete. I know I was thrilled to have my education paid for and get to play a sport I loved also. Kids these days like to talk about how tough it is, and it’s nothing compared to what it used to be. There was no turning homework in online, no resources like they have now, no personal tutors, no luxury dorms. It was nitty gritty. But, we were honored to get the chance to do it.

Difference in generations and mindset. I looked at it as a platform to set up my future. Work hard then, play later. Everyone just wants instant gratification and play now, look at me.

But I completely understand life as a student athlete… and it’s not that bad. Don’t forget about the hundred dollar bill handshakes, it’s a lot more at the big time schools, just have to be a stud. I never got any, but oh do I know some of my teammates that did. That was just at LaTech in the early 2000’s.

If your scholarship didn’t allow you to play on Friday nights, then I suppose you wouldn’t have, correct? We’re you paid $4k+ in addition to your scholarship? As to the Olympic sports angle, I can see Bama or Auburn boosters paying $200k for a good QB for an endorsement.

I think many people are missing the overriding point here. You want to preserve a current system that works great for the schools. But the current system will not survive. Let me emphasize that, WILL NOT SURVIVE. One word: Lawsuit. The lawsuit that’s likely to blow up the current system has already been filed. If the plaintiffs win, athletes will be paid, period, and free market principles will apply (amazing how people favor the free market until it might cost them something personally). And my overwhelming sense is that they will win. See this after the NCAA finally agreed to cost of attendance stipends.

<LINK_TEXT text=“https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spo … 7b9e5ab016”>https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2017/02/07/ncaa-settlement-on-past-cost-of-attendance-stipends-is-not-nearly-enough-sports-lawyer-jeffrey-kessler/?utm_term=.6a7b9e5ab016</LINK_TEXT>

“Using your head”, therefore, is to settle this case for something less than Kessler wants and more than what the athletes get now. “The way we’ve always done things” wasn’t an adequate defense in the O’Bannon case, and it’s not an adequate defense here.

It’s not really going to be hard to do. Instead of spending money on lavish student-athlete centers (we already have one) and paying head coaches $7 million, give the money to the athletes. If Bama and Auburn are crazy enough to pay a quarterback $200,000, let them. The other 84 guys on the roster will know it and resent it.

If you allow the players to openly market themselves sure it solves the problem.

But like ricepig said, I guarantee you Bama and many others would do that. The money would be endless.

If the NCAA starts paying them, say a 10,000 a year salary or stipend to every FBS scholarship player would cost around 100,000,000. Then you have more sports and athletes to go. Not to mention the other divisions. 10,000 is a considerable pay cut for some of those kids.

I agree with you that something will be done, there’s too much pressure being applied for it not to. I just am not so sure that direct payments from the NCAA or the school will be the route. I don’t know though.

If you let them market their name it’ll all be performance merit for their pay. I’m ok with that. But I know that eventually it won’t be enough, and also it will be really easy to manipulate the system for the big dogs.

We need something to create parody across the FBS, not make the Alabamas and Ohio states have an even bigger advantage. Imagine what Texas and their boosters would do, they could easily have all 85 scholarship players on endorsements for 6 figures each. I think I know where I would be going.