Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 105

Thread: Whatcha Think

  1. #1

    Whatcha Think

    Live in Houston, father to a pair of A&M grads (and a pair of LSU grads) so my interest in college football sets with those two schools (until Xavier returns football - not that will happen). Thus, and living in Houston, the question of the day, week, and month - 7/24 - is about the Johnny Manziel alleged autographing for money and an NCAA investigation.

    Couple that with the recent osu "tatoo scandal" and USA Today's (go to Google and enter Bilas NCAA shop) huge story about the NCAA itself selling jerseys with the number 2 on the front and "Football" on the back (an blatant skirt around the Manziel family trademark) and toss in the very recent discussion of the BCS powerhouses wanting stipends (as much as $2,000 per month per athlete) makes me wonder.

    Some of my thoughts are:

    Back in the day, waaay back in the day, the NCAA approved $15 per month per player for "laundry." At Xavier, that wasn't allowed by the University, but make no mistake about it, boosters in handshakes saw that some players, not all, got at least that much. And more than once, I took a player to a store in Norwood where he could get a coat in the wintertime at a reduced cost and cash from me. Once I argued with a top NCAA official that what I was doing was just being human. He said the NCAA could put us on probation and we'd be barred from TV in football, or the Dance in basketball. I asked him when was Xavier or any similar size program ever on TV, and since we were 5-21 that season, when did he think we'd get to the tournament. It was just an argument FOR getting help to the players above the $15.

    For 18 years I was brought in to the Final Four to work the media covering it, and in the lobby of the team's hotels companies were set up selling team shirts, Final Four stuff etc and the prices were $25 to $100 depending on the product. The event was a multi-million profit gig for the NCAA, and for the four schools. But players by the rules couldn't be given any cash other than a "per diem" check. I used to see players haggle with the sellers for a better price, to buy souvenirs for family members, etc. But give them enough to cover, no way said the NCAA. Now that may have changed, Muskieman may have better up to date info, but nevertheless the question remains.

    Now for eons, I have thought players should get something more than RBBTF. The NCAA rules are funny about it. No cash, but yes, a cel phone and the monthly bill is OK. Married? OK, your wife's hospitalization cost can be paid. Meals? Sure, four times a day at the training center, and no, its not what the rest of the student body gets at the school cafeteria..

    So, whatcha think?

    Should players get paid? How much? What about walk-on's? Year around or just in the season?

    Sound off......

  2. #2
    Supporting Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    14,800
    College athletes are already paid as far as I am concerned. How much does it cost to attend Xavier now?? Something in the neighborhood of 30-40k per year including room and board....I am guessing here as I graduated in 2004 and not sure how much it has gone up since I left. So in essence, they are being paid about 120-160k to attend if they stay all four years. No matter where they go, if they put their head in the game, they are getting a quality education and a network of high profile people that is invaluable.

    Now, does the NCAA along with the colleges and universities profit and use these kids? Yes absolutely and that is wrong. However, I don't think paying players is exactly the answer here. Two wrongs don't make a right. However, aren't the kids themselves also using the university and the NCAA in a way? They are using them to receive a free education, and in some cases, they are using them to go on to professional sports.

  3. #3
    Senior xavierj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Northern KY
    Posts
    5,907
    I am fine with them getting money as long as everyone has to play by the same rules. Pay them minimum wage for hours at practice and game time. That's like 15 to 20 hours a week. But the argument that because the school makes money off them is a little much since the school already gives them roughly $40,000 a year at a school like Xavier.

    Also how much do you pay the guys in med school, business school and law school? I am pretty sure the students, not the athletes, end up donating more money to the schools throughout time, than Johnny Football will bring in during his time.

  4. #4
    It's ridiculous and completely ignorant to assert that the NCAA and its member institutions "profit" off of collegiate athletes. By definition, the NCAA and its member institutions are non profits. Any money that is made (and there is a TON of money being made) gets put directly back into the overhead costs of running organizations, setting up tournaments, paying officials, as well as paying for athletic budgets and scholarships of all NCAA member schools, from DIII all the way up to DI.

    Does the NCAA have some problems? Absolutely. Should those problems be taken care of? Absolutely. But this whole idea of blowing up the model in order to pay those starving athletes enough money for their tattoos, guns, weed (I'm looking at you, Ohio State, Tennessee and UNC), and whatever else broke college students spend their non existent money on is crazy.

  5. #5
    Junior sirthought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NKY
    Posts
    2,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Giacomazzi View Post
    It's ridiculous and completely ignorant to assert that the NCAA and its member institutions "profit" off of collegiate athletes. By definition, the NCAA and its member institutions are non profits. Any money that is made (and there is a TON of money being made) gets put directly back into the overhead costs of running organizations, setting up tournaments, paying officials, as well as paying for athletic budgets and scholarships of all NCAA member schools, from DIII all the way up to DI.

    Does the NCAA have some problems? Absolutely. Should those problems be taken care of? Absolutely. But this whole idea of blowing up the model in order to pay those starving athletes enough money for their tattoos, guns, weed (I'm looking at you, Ohio State, Tennessee and UNC), and whatever else broke college students spend their non existent money on is crazy.
    I pretty much agree with this 100%. And it gets hairy when you start to look at who should get paid. Walk-ons? Only scholarship players? Only scholarship players in sports that earn real revenue (i.e. basketball and football)? There isn't enough to cover it all. And what if some hotshot decides he isn't getting as much as he should and goes on strike or something?

    Yes, someone is profiting, but it's not necessarily the schools themselves. Although, there are several coaches and admins making a much bigger income than anyone in their position should be making, but that's a different topic. Media networks profit. Merchandise manufacturers profit. Healthcare providers profit. Service people such as security profit. And probably some lawyers...there's always grubby lawyers. LOL

    The areas that seems to be gray are when a kid who otherwise has his freetime committed and can't truly spend any extra time on a regular basis to work for spending cash and then can't get help from someone who might be inclined to help. Clothes for a special event; spending money for taking out a date once in a blue moon; a night in a hotel for a basketball camp. This must seem so unfair at times to guys who really invest a lot of their lives to the school's team. I can see why resentment might exist, but the fact of the matter is higher education costs a lot and they need to focus on the opportunity they've been given.

  6. #6
    All-Conference Juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,837
    Quote Originally Posted by Giacomazzi View Post
    It's ridiculous and completely ignorant to assert that the NCAA and its member institutions "profit" off of collegiate athletes. By definition, the NCAA and its member institutions are non profits. Any money that is made (and there is a TON of money being made) gets put directly back into the overhead costs of running organizations, setting up tournaments, paying officials, as well as paying for athletic budgets and scholarships of all NCAA member schools, from DIII all the way up to DI.

    Does the NCAA have some problems? Absolutely. Should those problems be taken care of? Absolutely. But this whole idea of blowing up the model in order to pay those starving athletes enough money for their tattoos, guns, weed (I'm looking at you, Ohio State, Tennessee and UNC), and whatever else broke college students spend their non existent money on is crazy.
    RAYCESS!

    And it doesn't matter if they're poor or not, they earned the revenue. People pay to watch them play. They do not pay to see some middle aged coach, some old out of touch school president, or any other person who has an inflated salary because of the athletes playing college football and basketball.

  7. #7
    Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Juice View Post
    RAYCESS!

    And it doesn't matter if they're poor or not, they earned the revenue. People pay to watch them play. They do not pay to see some middle aged coach, some old out of touch school president, or any other person who has an inflated salary because of the athletes playing college football and basketball.
    Then it shouldn't matter who the coach is, right?

  8. #8
    Supporting Member MADXSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Finneytown
    Posts
    7,212
    Quote Originally Posted by Juice View Post
    RAYCESS!

    And it doesn't matter if they're poor or not, they earned the revenue. People pay to watch them play. They do not pay to see some middle aged coach, some old out of touch school president, or any other person who has an inflated salary because of the athletes playing college football and basketball.
    Not entirely. There are a lot of Div I teams that schedule buy games in order to subsidize their overhead. Div II & III don't pack the stands either. Outside of Basketball, Football and Hockey, there can't be too many revenue sports.

    My guess is that this is another thing being pushed by the football schools. Do what we say or we'll start our own organization.
    Balls of Steele!!

  9. #9
    Junior blobfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    3,510
    Paying student athletes seems a bit much but what about letting them take jobs at a fare wage even if it's above NCAA determined maximum? I've heard of cases where a kid was able to get a job in the summer where the union minimum for the work was higher than the NCAA allowed and got in trouble for it. That's just stupid. And why can't the NCAA set up a financial need fund for ALL student athletes that truly have a need not covered by room and board? If a kid is so poor that he/she can't afford new clothes but their sport doesn't allow time for a minimum wage part time job, there should be a mechanism to get them help. Unfortunately, the NCAA doesn't seem interested in such creative solutions and is chasing down kids for small violations like playing one game in 2nd summer league and dragging their feet in the clearinghouse.

  10. #10
    Junior LadyMuskie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    4,527
    Would you pay more to watch Xavier Basketball if Xavier had to pay its players? What about OSU Football or ND Football? Because there is no way that these schools are going to start paying its players without passing at least some of the cost on to the fans.

    I personally think it's a terrible idea. I agree with Blobfan, that the NCAA regulations on the jobs athletes can have is ridiculous, but I think paying student athletes is going to lead down a really bad path for college sports. The playing field is already not level when schools like Marshall or UC are trying to compete with powerhouses like OSU and Michigan in football. If a small, Catholic University like Xavier, with a small, tight-wad alumni base, had to try to entice players by offering them a salary, there's no way we could compete in that arena with the likes of IU, OSU, or Duke. At least now, we can compete because of comparable facilities, travel arrangements and success, but if we can't out-salary a big state school like OSU, and the only way we could would be to continue to raise prices to see Xavier play teams like Miami and so on.

    And this doesn't even touch on the fact that sports like baseball and soccer don't draw even half of the crowds basketball and football do. It's a logistical nightmare, and really doesn't make much sense. Some of these kids are getting extremely expensive educations for free at quality universities, while their peers pay thousands of dollars a semester to be in the same classes. That's their paycheck right there. My degree is worth just as much as David West's degree, but I didn't get a full ride to attend Xavier. I don't begrudge the basketball players their scholarships anymore than I begrudge the non-athletes who had full rides, but nevertheless, it is a perk that most of the students at a university don't receive!
    Xavier Basketball: We're Not Scared of Anyone!
    Zip Em Up!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •