The Committee To Save College Basketball

[CTWarrior]

I don't understand how getting free tuition, room & board, etc. is not already the equivalent of getting paid? Because I sure would have left MU with a lot less debt if I had those things paid for. I just don't understand the position that student athletes don't get anything. Is a free education nothing?

Their compensation package is significantly more than what a minor league basketball player would get.  So to me, they are paid their real value and then some.  The people that think the school name isn't 95% of the value don't get it.  How much would Marcus Howard be worth if he was playing for the Milwaukee Golden Eagles in the basketball equivalent of double A baseball?  Those games would be played in large high schools and would be lucky to draw 2,000 people a game.

The problem is that most of the participants in the big time sports do not get a true quality education, which is supposed to be their "pay".  That is the problem that nobody is addressing.  First of all, a large chunk of football and basketball players at the highest level have not done enough to prepare for the academic rigors of a real major, and would not sniff the universities they are attending if not for their athletic prowess.  Then, on top of that, they are put in a position where they miss class often due to travel (especially the cupcakes in November and December) and have excessive time demands placed on them for their sport, doubling down on the problems they were bound to have because of the lack of preparation.

We have forgotten what the deal is supposed to be.  Educate the players in return for their sports participation.  Sure for the dozen or two dozen guys who end up in the NBA each year that education is not that important, and maybe for 50-100 more each year who will make a living overseas.  But the other 95% hopefully would leave college with the ability to make money off of their degree like a regular student, and that does not happen near often enough in basketball and football, particularly in football where 80% or more of the players on the very best teams will never collect a check for playing football.

We are so cynical about the money that if you even bring stuff like this up people look at you like you have three heads.  The non-revenue sports are much closer to the ideal, since the participants don't have dreams of making gobs money off of their sport, and therefore are more likely to value the education.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Because it never is just a little bit.  In two years, it will be a little bit more.  And in four years, more. 

Isn't that called inflation?

Honestly, we are on the same side on this issue. I think the free education, room/board, coaching, exposure, tutoring, stipends, etc are fine compensation. If some want to negotiate a little bit more on the stipend, I think that's a reasonable request.

I would like to see the rules around "profiting off likeness" relaxed or totally eliminated. I think that addresses the concerns about the top 1% of athletes "deserving" more without bankrupting the schools or unbalancing competition.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Their compensation package is significantly more than what a minor league basketball players would get.  So to me, they are paid their real value and then some.  The fact that people think the school name isn't 95% of the value don't get it.  How much would Marcus Howard be worth if he was playing for the Milwaukee Golden Eagles in the basketball equivalent of double A baseball?  Those games would be played in large high schools and would be lucky to draw 2,000 people a game.

The problem is that most of the participants in the big time sports do not get a true quality education, which is supposed to be their "pay".  That is the problem that nobody is addressing.  First of all, a large chunk of football and basketball players at the highest level have not done enough to prepare for the academic rigors of a real major, and would not sniff the universities they are attending if not for their athletic prowess.  Then, on top of that, they are put in a position where they miss class often due to travel (especially the cupcakes in November and December) and have excessive time demands placed on them for their sport, doubling down on the problems they were bound to have because of the lack of preparation.

We have forgotten what the deal is supposed to be.  Educate the players in return for their sports participation.  Sure for the dozen or two dozen guys who end up in the NBA each year that education is not that important, and maybe for 50-100 more each year who will make a living overseas.  But the other 95% hopefully would leave college with the ability to make money off of their degree like a regular student, and that does not happen near often enough in basketball and football, particularly in football where 80% or more of the players on the very best teams will never collect a check for playing football.

We are so cynical about the money that if you even bring stuff like this up people look at you like you have three heads.  The non-revenue sports are much closer to the ideal, since the participants don't have dreams of making gobs money off of their sport, and therefore are more likely to value the education.

I agree with a lot of this. I think there's a strong argument for bring back the rule that made freshmen sit a year. Give them time to get ahead on their schoolwork, get used to campus life, and ease in to balancing the demands of athletics and academics. Alas, I don't see it ever happening. America loves star freshmen more than other players. Money will demand that they play right away.

[jesmu84]

Allow them to profit off their likeness and allow all sports to go pro after high school if they want to try it.

Between those 2 things, I think you've eliminated a lot of the current problems.

CTWarrior made a terrific post as well.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Allow them to profit off their likeness and allow all sports to go pro after high school if they want to try it.

Between those 2 things, I think you've eliminated a lot of the current problems.

CTWarrior made a terrific post as well.

That is not in the NCAA's purview. Personally, I don't have any issue with the league's making their own rules for who can and can't go pro. I think I like the NHL's system the best. Draft a kid out of high school but if he's not going to make your minor league roster than let him go to college, keep his rights, and sign him later.

[rocket surgeon]

Allow them to profit off their likeness and allow all sports to go pro after high school if they want to try it.

Between those 2 things, I think you've eliminated a lot of the current problems.

CTWarrior made a terrific post as well.

heck, why stop at high school?  why not whenever they want?  maybe even with their parents permission, but that may be a whole different topic  everyone knows lavars kids were probably ready by grade school...just ask him  

[MUBurrow]

That is not in the NCAA's purview. Personally, I don't have any issue with the league's making their own rules for who can and can't go pro. I think I like the NHL's system the best. Draft a kid out of high school but if he's not going to make your minor league roster than let him go to college, keep his rights, and sign him later.

I'm too lazy to find the quotes, but fwiw, I'm pretty sure that Silver is on the record as hating one and done. I caught part of his interview on Mike & Mike this morning, and he intimated that he'd like to see the the G-League start to take in and develop the best young talent. I think his goal is to have borderline first round, developmental guys help grow the NBA's popularity outside its core markets, and then get bumped up to the big squad after they have a year under their belt.

[TheyWereCones]

“Destroy the sense of purity in the college game?”

Do you believe in fairies and unicorns too?

I agree that paying the players beyond a scholarship is impractical for many reasons stated here. But there is nothing inpure about earning what you are worth according to the market.

Of course there are unethical aspects of the college game, many of which are currently under scrutiny. But by and large, I believe that most schools and most players are following most of the rules most of the time. Is it perfect? No. But I sure love March Madness and college basketball for what it is more than I care to watch the NBA playoffs, and my point in all of that was that if you start to pay players, the line between college basketball and the NBA dissolves.

Regarding earning what you are worth...no one is forcing 18-year olds to play college basketball. If they feel they can make more elsewhere, they are free to do that. If you are mad that the NBA won't take them right away, then go be salty at the NBA, but don't put that on the college game.

[TheyWereCones]

My niece was a big time NCAA women's basketball recruit and was told by an unnamed northern ACC school that with the food stipends, etc that they are allowed to give, if she didn't graduate with $30K in the bank, she was doing something wrong.  They are not starving.

Exactly. Or wait...+1.

[rocket surgeon]

Exactly. Or wait...+1.

how did she like syracuse?

[TinyTimsLittleBrother]

Of course there are unethical aspects of the college game, many of which are currently under scrutiny. But by and large, I believe that most schools and most players are following most of the rules most of the time. Is it perfect? No. But I sure love March Madness and college basketball for what it is more than I care to watch the NBA playoffs, and my point in all of that was that if you start to pay players, the line between college basketball and the NBA dissolves.

Regarding earning what you are worth...no one is forcing 18-year olds to play college basketball. If they feel they can make more elsewhere, they are free to do that. If you are mad that the NBA won't take them right away, then go be salty at the NBA, but don't put that on the college game.

I agree fundamentally with what you are saying.  I just don't like the concept of "purity."  In my opinion, there is nothing pure about college athletics or amateurism in general.  The current system is just a different form of compensation. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I'm too lazy to find the quotes, but fwiw, I'm pretty sure that Silver is on the record as hating one and done. I caught part of his interview on Mike & Mike this morning, and he intimated that he'd like to see the the G-League start to take in and develop the best young talent. I think his goal is to have borderline first round, developmental guys help grow the NBA's popularity outside its core markets, and then get bumped up to the big squad after they have a year under their belt.

Silver reads scoop apparently and came to your aid:

https://sports.yahoo.com/adam-silver-right-calling-end-one-done-rule-170421752.html

Article mentions the NHL system as a possibility. Anyone got a good reason why the NCAA shouldn't allow that in basketball as well? It seems to make sense to me.

[Tugg Speedman]

Jiggy

Can you tell us all how you are going to pay market rate, in other words not everyone is treated equally all while handling the non-revenue sports, Title IX, etc?

If you can point me to what Jay Bilas has said on this, that would also be appreciated.

The market rate is decided by the market ... the coaches are given resources and they allocate as they see fit.  That is how you determine the market rate.

You know this.  You know that 30 GMs determine the market rate in professional sports.  The owners give the GMs resources and they allocate as they see fit.

Chicos, you are smart and know economics well.  Why do the arteries in your head suddenly harden on this issue.

[Tugg Speedman]

I pretty much agree with 4to5years on this. There are too many issues to possibly list them all, but here are a few:

1. What happens when student-athletes who are paid less outperform those who are paid more? It would turn into the pros, where money is the focal point, and maybe I'm more of a purist, but I love college basketball for the team aspect of it and not watching 19-year olds whining about money. If they are good enough at the game, they can make a good living on their talent after college. If not, they have an education to fall back on (or at least they had the opportunity to do that).

So what!  You have a contract that you agreed to.  Too bad.  Welcome to getting paid.  If you're not ready for it, the patriot league or D3 might be more your speed.

And yes, the get a contract that stipulates a minimum GPA, morals clause term of service or how many years before you can jump to the pros, and other details.  Fail to meet any of these and there is a stated penalty in your contract.

They just don't dump a big pile of cash in your living room and say "welcome to our school."  Oh, you have to hire an accountant and pay taxes.  Wait until you see what NY will bang you in state taxes when you play at St. Johns and in the BET.  Welcome to the real world!!

2. I don't get where this new budget or these new funds come from. So now everyone in your model gets a scholarship PLUS the opportunity to be paid by the school, so I guess each school better add a pretty big line item to their fiscal planning. This immediately turns the schools who can afford the most to buy the best players a la Yankees, Cubs, etc. I don't want to see the richest schools winning all the time. Keep that in the pros.

It comes from the boosters.  The MU club will have fundraisers to raise money.  Booster spend it now under the table.  This brings up above board and all legal.

Remember that 80% to 90% of the players will accept a traditional scholarship as payments.  We are talking about the 10% to 20% game changers.

So who is going to pay the Men's tennis team?  They don't need that much.  Maybe $25k to offer an HS all-American to improve their team.  The MU club can solicit tennis fans and tennis alumni for the money.  Or maybe MU decides that scholarships alone are enough.  Whatever is important to you.

Yes, the rich schools have more resources ... like now.  Today the compete with facilities, that the poor schools cannot afford.  This actually makes it more equitable.  Want a good basketball team now?  Spend $10 million on facilities.  Want a good basketball team under this scheme, spend $250k on players.  It is fairer than the broken system now.

3. What revenue does a men's lacrosse bench player bring to the university? In that case, I think I brought MU more value by safely transporting students around campus as a L.I.M.O. driver. Maybe I should have received a full ride for that? If you want to look at it that way, why should a school pay anything, even tuition, for the "80 to 90% who don't matter" to essentially fulfill their dreams in a sport that doesn't drive school revenue?

Good question.  Why does MU have non-revenue teams?  What purpose do they serve?  Why have a music school, or a theater school?

If you decide that non-revenue sports don't serve a purpose, then cut them and give the money to the computer science department.  No one is stopping them now and paying players does not change this.

4. Why not pay high school athletes? My high school team was ranked top 5 in MN my senior year, and we made the school a crapload of money from ticket/concession sales. Why shouldn't I have been paid since that's how the real world works?

Why not?  Other than child labor laws are an issue ... go for it!

Keep the money in the pros. It would destroy any sense of purity in the college game. They have their whole lives ahead of them to earn as much money as they want. If they don't like it, they don't have to play. No one is forcing them to play college basketball. No one is forcing them to play all four years. Maybe removing the NBA rule that causes most to play for one year would be a solution that you are more in favor of, that would also certainly be a thousand times easier to implement? Whatever the case, college sports would be destroyed by greed if you start introducing individual payments.


College sports are pro programs.  See Kentucky. 

Purity?    You cannot have a ranked program getting 19k to Villanova on national TV and whine about purity.  Go to D3 and play Oshkosh in front 650 people then you have the purity you desire.

[Tugg Speedman]

I feel like this argument always becomes two extremes. "Pay them like pros!" and "They are already paid enough!" What if we just increased their stipends a little bit. A nice middle ground. Make sure we don't have any starving athletes but also doesn't destroy college sports as we know it.

You do realize they are getting paid now.  I can tell you for a fact they are boosters at all schools that take it upon themselves to "take care" of the players on their teams.  They do it without the knowledge or the consent of the schools.  They inject themselves into the process and pay recruits and players to attend their school.

And I have not even gotten to gamblers that are fixing college games because the players are not paid and they are "cheap."  Pros cannot be fixed because they cost too much.  The amount you have to pay the pros to throw a game you could never lay off in bets.  (that's why some gamblers went after the refs.  They are cheap to pay off).

There is tons of money in college sports now.  The only way to fight it is to make it legal and pay the stars.

[Tugg Speedman]

September 16, 2013

http://time.com/568/its-time-to-pay-college-athletes/

[brewcity77]

I pretty much agree with 4to5years on this. There are too many issues to possibly list them all, but here are a few:

1. What happens when student-athletes who are paid less outperform those who are paid more? It would turn into the pros, where money is the focal point, and maybe I'm more of a purist, but I love college basketball for the team aspect of it and not watching 19-year olds whining about money. If they are good enough at the game, they can make a good living on their talent after college. If not, they have an education to fall back on (or at least they had the opportunity to do that).

So what!  You have a contract that you agreed to.  Too bad.  Welcome to getting paid.  If you're not ready for it, the patriot league or D3 might be more your speed.

And yes, the get a contract that stipulates a minimum GPA, morals clause term of service or how many years before you can jump to the pros, and other details.  Fail to meet any of these and there is a stated penalty in your contract.

They just don't dump a big pile of cash in your living room and say "welcome to our school."  Oh, you have to hire an accountant and pay taxes.  Wait until you see what NY will bang you in state taxes when you play at St. Johns and in the BET.  Welcome to the real world!!

2. I don't get where this new budget or these new funds come from. So now everyone in your model gets a scholarship PLUS the opportunity to be paid by the school, so I guess each school better add a pretty big line item to their fiscal planning. This immediately turns the schools who can afford the most to buy the best players a la Yankees, Cubs, etc. I don't want to see the richest schools winning all the time. Keep that in the pros.

It comes from the boosters.  The MU club will have fundraisers to raise money.  Booster spend it now under the table.  This brings up above board and all legal.

Remember that 80% to 90% of the players will accept a traditional scholarship as payments.  We are talking about the 10% to 20% game changers.

So who is going to pay the Men's tennis team?  They don't need that much.  Maybe $25k to offer an HS all-American to improve their team.  The MU club can solicit tennis fans and tennis alumni for the money.  Or maybe MU decides that scholarships alone are enough.  Whatever is important to you.

Yes, the rich schools have more resources ... like now.  Today the compete with facilities, that the poor schools cannot afford.  This actually makes it more equitable.  Want a good basketball team now?  Spend $10 million on facilities.  Want a good basketball team under this scheme, spend $250k on players.  It is fairer than the broken system now.

3. What revenue does a men's lacrosse bench player bring to the university? In that case, I think I brought MU more value by safely transporting students around campus as a L.I.M.O. driver. Maybe I should have received a full ride for that? If you want to look at it that way, why should a school pay anything, even tuition, for the "80 to 90% who don't matter" to essentially fulfill their dreams in a sport that doesn't drive school revenue?

Good question.  Why does MU have non-revenue teams?  What purpose do they serve?  Why have a music school, or a theater school?

If you decide that non-revenue sports don't serve a purpose, then cut them and give the money to the computer science department.  No one is stopping them now and paying players does not change this.

4. Why not pay high school athletes? My high school team was ranked top 5 in MN my senior year, and we made the school a crapload of money from ticket/concession sales. Why shouldn't I have been paid since that's how the real world works?

Why not?  Other than child labor laws are an issue ... go for it!

Keep the money in the pros. It would destroy any sense of purity in the college game. They have their whole lives ahead of them to earn as much money as they want. If they don't like it, they don't have to play. No one is forcing them to play college basketball. No one is forcing them to play all four years. Maybe removing the NBA rule that causes most to play for one year would be a solution that you are more in favor of, that would also certainly be a thousand times easier to implement? Whatever the case, college sports would be destroyed by greed if you start introducing individual payments.


College sports are pro programs.  See Kentucky. 

Purity?    You cannot have a ranked program getting 19k to Villanova on national TV and whine about purity.  Go to D3 and play Oshkosh in front 650 people then you have the purity you desire.

Okay... You really have this whole quoting thing all wrong. Changing color does not make it evident who is talking or who you are talking to.

Use the quote feature, then after the part you want to address, type in [/quote.] without the period. Then add your response. If you want to address more, copy and paste their original [qu.ote author=...........] box before the next part you want to talk about with another close quote box after. Respond, rinse, repeat.

[Galway Eagle]

I pretty much agree with 4to5years on this. There are too many issues to possibly list them all, but here are a few:

1. What happens when student-athletes who are paid less outperform those who are paid more? It would turn into the pros, where money is the focal point, and maybe I'm more of a purist, but I love college basketball for the team aspect of it and not watching 19-year olds whining about money. If they are good enough at the game, they can make a good living on their talent after college. If not, they have an education to fall back on (or at least they had the opportunity to do that).

So what!  You have a contract that you agreed to.  Too bad.  Welcome to getting paid.  If you're not ready for it, the patriot league or D3 might be more your speed.

And yes, the get a contract that stipulates a minimum GPA, morals clause term of service or how many years before you can jump to the pros, and other details.  Fail to meet any of these and there is a stated penalty in your contract.

They just don't dump a big pile of cash in your living room and say "welcome to our school."  Oh, you have to hire an accountant and pay taxes.  Wait until you see what NY will bang you in state taxes when you play at St. Johns and in the BET.  Welcome to the real world!!

2. I don't get where this new budget or these new funds come from. So now everyone in your model gets a scholarship PLUS the opportunity to be paid by the school, so I guess each school better add a pretty big line item to their fiscal planning. This immediately turns the schools who can afford the most to buy the best players a la Yankees, Cubs, etc. I don't want to see the richest schools winning all the time. Keep that in the pros.

It comes from the boosters.  The MU club will have fundraisers to raise money.  Booster spend it now under the table.  This brings up above board and all legal.

Remember that 80% to 90% of the players will accept a traditional scholarship as payments.  We are talking about the 10% to 20% game changers.

So who is going to pay the Men's tennis team?  They don't need that much.  Maybe $25k to offer an HS all-American to improve their team.  The MU club can solicit tennis fans and tennis alumni for the money.  Or maybe MU decides that scholarships alone are enough.  Whatever is important to you.

Yes, the rich schools have more resources ... like now.  Today the compete with facilities, that the poor schools cannot afford.  This actually makes it more equitable.  Want a good basketball team now?  Spend $10 million on facilities.  Want a good basketball team under this scheme, spend $250k on players.  It is fairer than the broken system now.

3. What revenue does a men's lacrosse bench player bring to the university? In that case, I think I brought MU more value by safely transporting students around campus as a L.I.M.O. driver. Maybe I should have received a full ride for that? If you want to look at it that way, why should a school pay anything, even tuition, for the "80 to 90% who don't matter" to essentially fulfill their dreams in a sport that doesn't drive school revenue?

Good question.  Why does MU have non-revenue teams?  What purpose do they serve?  Why have a music school, or a theater school?

If you decide that non-revenue sports don't serve a purpose, then cut them and give the money to the computer science department.  No one is stopping them now and paying players does not change this.

4. Why not pay high school athletes? My high school team was ranked top 5 in MN my senior year, and we made the school a crapload of money from ticket/concession sales. Why shouldn't I have been paid since that's how the real world works?

Why not?  Other than child labor laws are an issue ... go for it!

Keep the money in the pros. It would destroy any sense of purity in the college game. They have their whole lives ahead of them to earn as much money as they want. If they don't like it, they don't have to play. No one is forcing them to play college basketball. No one is forcing them to play all four years. Maybe removing the NBA rule that causes most to play for one year would be a solution that you are more in favor of, that would also certainly be a thousand times easier to implement? Whatever the case, college sports would be destroyed by greed if you start introducing individual payments.


College sports are pro programs.  See Kentucky. 

Purity?    You cannot have a ranked program getting 19k to Villanova on national TV and whine about purity.  Go to D3 and play Oshkosh in front 650 people then you have the purity you desire.

Two questions on the answers. You sort of just brush off payment of HS athletes with child labor laws but I feel like that’d only prevent a handful of freshmen from payment and the vast majority of schools don’t have freshmen playing varsity anyways.

Second, the purity argument doesn’t really hold. The GAA brings over 80k to croke Park for the All Ireland Hurling and football games and people are ok with it being amatuer because it’s reinvested into smaller clubs. That’s what the NCAA should do instead of just hoarding money. Level the playing field or develop an AAU youth league that they can control to prevent money getting involved.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

You do realize they are getting paid now.  I can tell you for a fact they are boosters at all schools that take it upon themselves to "take care" of the players on their teams.  They do it without the knowledge or the consent of the schools.  They inject themselves into the process and pay recruits and players to attend their school.

And I have not even gotten to gamblers that are fixing college games because the players are not paid and they are "cheap."  Pros cannot be fixed because they cost too much.  The amount you have to pay the pros to throw a game you could never lay off in bets.  (that's why some gamblers went after the refs.  They are cheap to pay off).

There is tons of money in college sports now.  The only way to fight it is to make it legal and pay the stars.

I don't care. Honestly. To me that's not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Keep things the way they are but let the players profit off their likeness. Colleges don't go bankrupt, there's no massive overhaul of college sports, no Title IX issues, non-revenue and women's sports don't get screwed over, the top 1% of athletes get to make more money like people think they deserve, and I get my NCAA football/basketball video games back. Seems like wins across the board to me.

[B. McBannerson]

You do realize they are getting paid now.  I can tell you for a fact they are boosters at all schools that take it upon themselves to "take care" of the players on their teams.  They do it without the knowledge or the consent of the schools.  They inject themselves into the process and pay recruits and players to attend their school.

And I have not even gotten to gamblers that are fixing college games because the players are not paid and they are "cheap."  Pros cannot be fixed because they cost too much.  The amount you have to pay the pros to throw a game you could never lay off in bets.  (that's why some gamblers went after the refs.  They are cheap to pay off).

There is tons of money in college sports now.  The only way to fight it is to make it legal and pay the stars.

A fact? Really. You know for a fact that all schools are taking care of players.  All DI, all DII schools where kids are on scholarship?  Wait, let's just make it DI.  All 350+ DI schools' boosters are taking care of players.




On what authority or experience do you get to make this great proclamation? Your vast years of experience working at these schools? Your time in the FBI? Your time at the NCAA?  Your time as a well heeled booster? 

Ahh, and the solution is to pay everyone, of course you still haven't addressed what you are doing about non-revenue sports.  Title IX, etc. Nor have you explained the money that is there now and what it is currently used for, how you plan on simply taking that away to fund your pet project.   

[B. McBannerson]

September 16, 2013

http://time.com/568/its-time-to-pay-college-athletes/

Maybe your best post ever, but not in the way you intended.  You argue to pay college athletes, and you bring this home by putting a cover of Time Magazine with Johnny Manziel on the cover.  If ever there was poster child for paying college athletes.

[Tugg Speedman]

Maybe your best post ever, but not in the way you intended.  You argue to pay college athletes, and you bring this home by putting a cover of Time Magazine with Johnny Manziel on the cover.  If ever there was poster child for paying college athletes.

What's your point?  Becuase Manziel was irresponsible that no one should get money? 

[Tugg Speedman]

I don't care. Honestly. To me that's not a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Keep things the way they are but let the players profit off their likeness. Colleges don't go bankrupt, there's no massive overhaul of college sports, no Title IX issues, non-revenue and women's sports don't get screwed over, the top 1% of athletes get to make more money like people think they deserve, and I get my NCAA football/basketball video games back. Seems like wins across the board to me.

So an MU booster(s) will offer a new MU recruit big dollars to use his likeness in an advertising campaign.  Think of all the car dealers that are basketball fans and group together to offer recruits $$$ for their likeness.

This is what the NCAA is afraid of ... tons and tons of car dealers/boosters will pay up .... excuse me ... offer the new highly rated recruit an endorsement contract.  Of course, none of this is a defacto way to get players to your favorite school.  It is all above board ... right?

To be clear ... I'm in favor of this.  But when you do this, the floodgates are open and Wojo might as well show up at Joey Hauser's home with a contract.  Otherwise, the Greater Milwaukee car dealers/MU boosters will follow five minutes behind Wojo with that contract.  Then the greater Lansing Michigan/MSU boosters will do the same an hour after Izzo's home visit.

[Tugg Speedman]

A fact? Really. You know for a fact that all schools are taking care of players.  All DI, all DII schools where kids are on scholarship?  Wait, let's just make it DI.  All 350+ DI schools' boosters are taking care of players.

On what authority or experience do you get to make this great proclamation? Your vast years of experience working at these schools? Your time in the FBI? Your time at the NCAA?  Your time as a well heeled booster? 

Ahh, and the solution is to pay everyone, of course you still haven't addressed what you are doing about non-revenue sports.  Title IX, etc. Nor have you explained the money that is there now and what it is currently used for, how you plan on simply taking that away to fund your pet project.

The 65 power six schools ... yes.

Here is an example ... nearly every school has one (or more) of these boosters ...

Booster Proud of His Largess and Game-Day Parties
The New York Times
October 4, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/05/sports/ncaafootball/booster-proud-of-his-largess-and-game-day-parties.html

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Roy Adams’s two-story brick home is tucked neatly into a middle-class residential street. In the driveway, University of Tennessee and Southeastern Conference flags fly at full staff. On the front door, a poster urges his guests to adhere to a five-drink limit.

Adams may be 75 years old, but his home looks like something dreamed up by teenage fraternity brothers: he has 36 big-screen televisions, five TV viewing rooms, three game rooms, a wet bar and, on a recent afternoon, two tapped kegs.

Adams, a retired restaurant and real estate developer, has been called the Great Gatsby of college sports for his legendary game-day parties, which often include athletes, coaches and politicians mixing with a crowd that can top 100. But he is more than a septuagenarian party animal.

A 1963 graduate of Tennessee, Adams represents the twilight of a college sports booster. For more than 40 years, he cherished his role as a benefactor for players, even if it meant breaking a few rules. If college athletes generally receive gifts in the shadows, Roy Adams is the rare booster who crows about his largess.

He is not remorseful, and now, largely out of the booster game, he says he is proud of his life’s work and the friendships he has made.

Continue reading the main story
“I knew the N.C.A.A. rules,” he said. “I just didn’t care for them.”

As a national debate swirls over whether college athletes should be paid, Adams revels in memories of the old days when he distributed cash with a wink to favored players. By his own estimate, he has spent $400,000 on food, clothes, cash and a handful of cars for college athletes.

“I’ve always found him to be one of the more fascinating people I’ve met in college sports,” said Paul Finebaum, an ESPN radio host and former columnist. “He’s a throwback to a more romantic time.”

Today’s boosters, Adams said, have lost the intimate relationships with players he always sought. From his perspective, the N.C.A.A. rules have tightened drastically. And the players have changed too. “Today you give a kid a Chevrolet, and he wants a Cadillac,” Adams said. “You give them $1,000, they want two or three. It’s not the same as it used to be.”

Adams has been a Tennessee football fan for decades, but now, instead of making trips to Knoxville, he brings the party to his TV rooms — all five of them. On a typical Saturday, guests spill from room to room, passing a shuffleboard table, a stuffed deer head, a signed photograph from the former Tennessee star Peyton Manning.

On one wall a photograph of Adams shaking hands with Nick Saban hangs above a signed picture of Richard Nixon. In the pantry, Adams had a urinal installed. Then there are all the televisions, squeezed together like puzzle pieces around every corner. His friends say there is no better sports bar in Memphis.

On a recent afternoon, the Shelby County mayor was a guest. Romaro Miller, who played quarterback at Mississippi before Eli Manning, was there. So were Bobby Ray Franklin, the quarterback who led Ole Miss to a share of the 1959 national championship, and Ron Gust, who played for Tennessee in the 1950s.

On fall Saturdays, two cooks arrive at Adams’s home at 7 a.m. to prepare a menu of more than 30 dishes in an industrial-size kitchen Adams had installed several years ago. He offers a buffet that ranges from sushi to fried chicken cooked in a vat on the back patio. Adams said he spends around $1,500 each weekend on the spread.

On this afternoon, Adams’s beloved Tennessee visited Florida. As a flood of guests arrived before kickoff, Adams bellowed gleefully, “No Democrats or Florida fans allowed!”


Roy Adams’s home in Memphis has 36 big-screen televisions, game rooms and a trove of University of Tennessee memorabilia. Credit Lance Murphey for The New York Times


Many of the guests are former college players and beneficiaries of Adams’s generosity, creating an eclectic mix of boosters, former jocks and current high school coaches from around the area. Most SEC teams are represented among the crowd. An Arkansas fan chided Volunteer supporters about the hillbillies in east Tennessee. Female Ole Miss students were the butt of another joke.

Adams hurried from room to room, making sure the food was just so and each guest properly attended to. Stories tumbled out of his mouth in between sips from an old-fashioned. “Nobody’s wife would ever let them do this,” he said. “I’m a bachelor, so I can.”

Adams recalls his bending of the N.C.A.A. rules with a wistful smile. He described players lining up outside his Knoxville hotel room knowing he would happily slip them a few bucks. Players at Arkansas State, Memphis and Ole Miss have also been the recipients of his generosity and hospitality.

Adams has had several run-ins with the N.C.A.A. and his alma mater. He said the former Tennessee athletic director Doug Dickey once confronted him outside the locker room and told him to stay away from the team. The N.C.A.A. investigated Adams in the late 1980s for sponsoring a recruiting trip for two players to visit the University of Houston. Adams’s defense was that he never did the bidding of any one school. He said he regularly sent money to Cortez Kennedy, the Pro Football Hall of Fame defensive tackle, when he played at Miami. It was proper, he said, because he had no association to the school.

“I’m a friend to all athletes, everywhere,” he said, beaming.

In 2000, Adams became well known in Tennessee circles as a commentator who helped spark the federal investigation and conviction of Logan Young, an Alabama booster in Memphis who paid a coach $150,000 to steer defensive lineman Albert Means to Tuscaloosa.

In a wrongful termination civil suit later brought by two Alabama coaches that stemmed from the Young case, Adams was deposed. He wore a white coonskin cap and an orange blazer and brought along a bottle of Tennessee sipping whiskey to the proceedings.

Adams relishes the memory. “I couldn’t think of anything that would upset an Alabama lawyer more,” he said.

Adams was born in Batesville, Miss., to tenant farmers and moved to Memphis in childhood. As a teenager, he worked as a Senate page in Washington. Autographed pictures of Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy and Estes Kefauver are prominent on the walls. (His politics shifted right after the Jimmy Carter administration.)

At Tennessee, he fell in love with the pageantry of football. When he returned to Memphis, he served on the national board of governors for the Tennessee Alumni Association. “I didn’t have a family,” he said. “This became my family.”

Adams managed a Goodyear store in Memphis and then opened a chain of Adams Family Restaurants. He worked in real estate before retiring. As he reflected on the string of scandals gripping college sports, in part because of boosters like him, he chuckled.

“It’s funny,” he said. “You’d be right to say I wasted my life on football, but it can be a very emotional game.”

He added: “I like to take care of people. Now I want people to come over here and enjoy themselves.”

Late in the afternoon, a graphic flashed on one of the televisions showing the seven straight national championships won by SEC teams. Adams’s eyes gleamed as he chanted, “S-E-C! S-E-C!”

“All this — the parties, the friends, the football,” said Pete Story, a local high school coach. “I think it’s what keeps Roy alive.”

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So an MU booster(s) will offer a new MU recruit big dollars to use his likeness in an advertising campaign.  Think of all the car dealers that are basketball fans and group together to offer recruits $$$ for their likeness.

This is what the NCAA is afraid of ... tons and tons of car dealers/boosters will pay up .... excuse me ... offer the new highly rated recruit an endorsement contract.  Of course, none of this is a defacto way to get players to your favorite school.  It is all above board ... right?

To be clear ... I'm in favor of this.  But when you do this, the floodgates are open and Wojo might as well show up at Joey Hauser's home with a contract.  Otherwise, the Greater Milwaukee car dealers/MU boosters will follow five minutes behind Wojo with that contract.  Then the greater Lansing Michigan/MSU boosters will do the same an hour after Izzo's home visit.

Doesn't this just prove that shady sh*t will happen no matter what?

I think there are ways to reasonably regulate this if players are allowed to profit off their likenesses. And people will find ways around those regulations....but it won't be as shady because there will be more legal options that recruits can utilize.