MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: wadesworld on October 15, 2016, 12:18:32 PM
-
Poor Nigel Hayes was on Gameday with a sign saying, "Broke college athlete. Anything helps. Venmo: brokebadger1"
Your full scholarship, weekly stipend, free food, free clothes, free shoes, and free room and board are really throwing you into poverty there, Nigel.
The kid is such a clown he can't even spell his Venmo username correctly. "Brokebadger1" is someone named Taurean. "Brokebadger" is "Nigel H." So people are sending payments to both accounts but he's only getting some of the payments. So dumb he can't even get his own username right.
Can't wait until the NCAA comes sniffing around. They could kill 2 birds with 1 stone and look into Bo's financials and "extracurricular activities." Of course they won't look into either.
-
How would "Bo's financials and 'extracurricular activities'" be in violation of NCAA rules?
-
How would "Bo's financials and 'extracurricular activities'" be in violation of NCAA rules?
Not sure. He heard the NCAA was "aware." I'm not in any way an expert on NCAA laws, just was told they knew about the situation. Not sure if that means there may have been something that would be illegal by NCAA rules going on or what.
I do know UW alums sending payments to a UW basketball player's Venmo account would be a big time NCAA violation.
-
The kid is such a clown he can't even spell his Venmo username correctly. "Brokebadger1" is someone named Taurean. "Brokebadger" is "Nigel H." So people are sending payments to both accounts but he's only getting some of the payments. So dumb he can't even get his own username right.
BTW, apparently "Brokebadger1" is a friend of his from Dayton. My guess is that the money is going there so nothing runs afoul of NCAA rules. Or maybe Hayes doesn't need it but his friend does.
So I guess he's not quite as dumb as you think.
-
BTW, apparently "Brokebadger1" is a friend of his from Dayton. My guess is that the money is going there so nothing runs afoul of NCAA rules. Or maybe Hayes doesn't need it but his friend does.
So I guess he's not quite as dumb as you think.
And "Brokebadger" is registered to "Nigel H" and payments are being sent to both accounts. So he's definitely dumb enough.
-
Then again if his jumper wasn't so broke he might be getting paid a whole lot more right now so in that sense he's right.
-
His account isn't collecting.
-
Poor Nigel Hayes was on Gameday with a sign saying, "Broke college athlete. Anything helps. Venmo: brokebadger1"
Your full scholarship, weekly stipend, free food, free clothes, free shoes, and free room and board are really throwing you into poverty there, Nigel.
The kid is such a clown he can't even spell his Venmo username correctly. "Brokebadger1" is someone named Taurean. "Brokebadger" is "Nigel H." So people are sending payments to both accounts but he's only getting some of the payments. So dumb he can't even get his own username right.
Can't wait until the NCAA comes sniffing around. They could kill 2 birds with 1 stone and look into Bo's financials and "extracurricular activities." Of course they won't look into either.
It's absurd that a guy who's part of a program that adds millions upon millions in value annually through ticket sales, merchandise sales, alumni relations,and TV agreements would want compensation beyond snacks and a degree! Before you know it, the coaches will want to get paid too!
-
It's absurd that a guy who's part of a program that adds millions upon millions in value annually through ticket sales, merchandise sales, alumni relations,and TV agreements would want compensation beyond snacks and a degree! Before you know it, the coaches will want to get paid too!
Simple. Go play overseas. Or develop a jumper so you're actually good enough to get paid in this country.
-
I dislike (loathe) the Badgers just as much as the next MU fan, but he does have a point. Can't believe I'm actually siding with Nigel Hayes on this one.
-
I wonder if his signage will cause the ratings for Badger basketball games to drop.
-
I dislike (loathe) the Badgers just as much as the next MU fan, but he does have a point. Can't believe I'm actually siding with Nigel Hayes on this one.
He kind of has a point. He is minimizing the value of the college education IMO. He also is not taking into account that his marginal value is minimal at best. (If Nigel never got a scholarship, someone else would have and the overall impact on college basketball would have been minimal.)
-
His account isn't collecting.
::) If you insist.
Not sure why it's not letting me attach the images on here, but his account is definitely collecting payments. I have 5 screenshots (and could do more) worth of scrolling through the payments he received within the last couple hours.
-
::) If you insist.
Not sure why it's not letting me attach the images on here, but his account is definitely collecting payments. I have 5 screenshots (and could do more) worth of scrolling through the payments he received within the last couple hours.
Just going by what Matt V. tweeted a couple hours ago.
-
Just going by what Matt V. tweeted a couple hours ago.
Fair enough. Maybe the second "brokebadger" account with the name "Nigel H" isn't actually Nigel Hayes and saw an opportunity to potentially collect some payments from people he knew would pay an account with his name. But if you have a Venmo you can go to "Search people" and type in the username "brokebadger" and click on his name. It then shows the feed of all the activity on the account, and the account is certainly actively receiving payments.
-
He kind of has a point. He is minimizing the value of the college education IMO. He also is not taking into account that his marginal value is minimal at best. (If Nigel never got a scholarship, someone else would have and the overall impact on college basketball would have been minimal.)
+1
The only reason that anyone cares about Hayes (or any college athlete for that matter) is that they play for the school that you like. Their "value" is very, very minimal. If Hayes wanted to get paid he could have played in the D-League this year, in front of dozens of adoring fans making pocket change. When you add up all of the pieces (tuition, room, board, books, stipend, travel, athlete perks, etc.) plus the future value the education, degree, and exposure provides, these athletes are more than fairly compensated.
-
+1
The only reason that anyone cares about Hayes (or any college athlete for that matter) is that they play for the school that you like. Their "value" is very, very minimal. If Hayes wanted to get paid he could have played in the D-League this year, in front of dozens of adoring fans making pocket change. When you add up all of the pieces (tuition, room, board, books, stipend, travel, athlete perks, etc.) plus the future value the education, degree, and exposure provides, these athletes are more than fairly compensated.
I'm wondering if you would feel fairly compensated if your employer told you he was no longer going to pay you. From now on, only benefits, but no money.
-
I am embarrassed by Nigel's actions. He doesn't understand the value he is receiving, or the opportunity to springboard to the NBA which the UW provides him. Free of charge.
-
I'm wondering if you would feel fairly compensated if your employer told you he was no longer going to pay you. From now on, only benefits, but no money.
Well, a better analogy might be if my employer said that they would pay my mortgage, car payment, student loans, food, utilities, insurance, etc., and give me some spending money. That's essentially the deal that these athletes are getting.
Secondly, an employer that did what you suggested would quickly lose most, it not all of their employees to competitors and cripple the company - that's the "value" of the employees. If Nigel Hayes leaves Wisconsin (which he will after this season), the program doesn't miss a beat - fans will still come to the games, buy the jerseys, etc. Hayes' "value" is minimal.
-
Well, a better analogy might be if my employer said that they would pay my mortgage, car payment, student loans, food, utilities, insurance, etc., and give me some spending money. That's essentially the deal that these athletes are getting.
Secondly, an employer that did what you suggested would quickly lose most, it not all of their employees to competitors and cripple the company - that's the "value" of the employees. If Nigel Hayes leaves Wisconsin (which he will after this season), the program doesn't miss a beat - fans will still come to the games, buy the jerseys, etc. Hayes' "value" is minimal.
Exactly.
-
And "Brokebadger" is registered to "Nigel H" and payments are being sent to both accounts. So he's definitely dumb enough.
People may be sending to both, but I am pretty sure Hayes is smart enough to know that he's asking for the money to be sent to someone else's account. I can understand people thinking Hayes is overly outspoken, occasionally obnoxious, or otherwise offensive, but he's definitely not stupid. I'd guess this is a deliberate attempt to get money into his friend's account, which he may very well split with him after the fact.
-
College athletes do it by choice. If they think a free college education in exchange for playing is a bad deal, they can go play overseas.
-
People may be sending to both, but I am pretty sure Hayes is smart enough to know that he's asking for the money to be sent to someone else's account. I can understand people thinking Hayes is overly outspoken, occasionally obnoxious, or otherwise offensive, but he's definitely not stupid. I'd guess this is a deliberate attempt to get money into his friend's account, which he may very well split with him after the fact.
ESPN says any money received is going to Dane County Boys & Girls Club
-
I hate the sanctity of the game argument but at the same time if you start making college bball a business (lower academic standards and paying players), what's the point? The basketball is actually pretty bad. I think fans like the 'grit' and other intangible parts of the game but 80% of d1 players aren't even good enough for the dleague, where they get paid 50k a year. Yeah the Tim tebows of the world get screwed now but are you trying to accomplish? If you change the system I see it collapsing and it will hurt marginal guys like Nigel who is getting exposure and a great education. If he had to go through a dleague or Europe no one would have heard of him.
-
Woah. Did an athlete just do a nonviolent protest, to raise awareness to an issue that is important them, with goal to have millions of eyeballs on ESPN.com read about it?
No, he just must be another dumb jock and a clown.
-
I'm just amazed that after all these years, with all the demand people apparently have to watch these athletes, nobody has created a viable minor league system for basketball or football. After all, there are hundreds of millions of dollars -- billions even -- out there. Maybe, just maybe, the reason we haven't seen anyone try it on a large scale is that fans really don't give a crap about the athletes. College athletes generate billions of dollars because people are passionate about the schools -- not the athletes. We all waste more time than we should on MUScoop. The specific people we discuss on this board are usually discussed for one of several reasons: 1) we hope they will come to Marquette; 2) they decided to come to Marquette; 3) they decided to attend a school that is a rival of Marquette; or 4) they are playing against Marquette. I sense a common theme.
Clearly, college football and basketball generate a huge amount of money. But the players are secondary to that. If Nigel Hayes hadn't decided to head to Madison from Toledo, hardly anyone in Madison would have even the faintest idea who he was, and those who did wouldn't care. Wisconsin simply would have assigned that No. 10 jersey to the next kid through the door. One could argue that Hayes owes Wisconsin as much as Wisconsin owes him. Fortunately, both are paying their share in the transaction. Hayes plays hard for their team and Wisconsin is giving him education, room, board, travel, training, clothes, etc.
-
I'm just amazed that after all these years, with all the demand people apparently have to watch these athletes, nobody has created a viable minor league system for basketball or football. After all, there are hundreds of millions of dollars -- billions even -- out there. Maybe, just maybe, the reason we haven't seen anyone try it on a large scale is that fans really don't give a crap about the athletes. College athletes generate billions of dollars because people are passionate about the schools -- not the athletes. We all waste more time than we should on MUScoop. The specific people we discuss on this board are usually discussed for one of several reasons: 1) we hope they will come to Marquette; 2) they decided to come to Marquette; 3) they decided to attend a school that is a rival of Marquette; or 4) they are playing against Marquette. I sense a common theme.
Clearly, college football and basketball generate a huge amount of money. But the players are secondary to that. If Nigel Hayes hadn't decided to head to Madison from Toledo, hardly anyone in Madison would have even the faintest idea who he was, and those who did wouldn't care. Wisconsin simply would have assigned that No. 10 jersey to the next kid through the door. One could argue that Hayes owes Wisconsin as much as Wisconsin owes him. Fortunately, both are paying their share in the transaction. Hayes plays hard for their team and Wisconsin is giving him education, room, board, travel, training, clothes, etc.
Hayes is a dink, but wouldn't all your comments be applicable to pro sports as well? People are passionate about the teams. Would gren bae fans be nuts over a person like Clay Matthews if he wasn't in their uniform?
-
Woah. Did an athlete just do a nonviolent protest, to raise awareness to an issue that is important them, with goal to have millions of eyeballs on ESPN.com read about it?
No, he just must be another dumb jock and a clown.
You're ignoring the third possibility - that both are true.
-
Woah. Did an athlete just do a nonviolent protest, to raise awareness to an issue that is important them, with goal to have millions of eyeballs on ESPN.com read about it?
No, he just must be another dumb jock and a clown.
Don't forget that he is raising money for charity in the process.
But it's just easier for the Skip Wadesworlds of the world to label him "dumb."
-
Don't forget that he is raising money for charity in the process.
But it's just easier for the Skip Wadesworlds of the world to label him "dumb."
It's clear as day that you can't accept payments from boosters as a student athlete. Pretty dumb for Nigel to do just that. But hey, if that makes me Skip Bayless then I'm all for it.
Not to mention it's pretty dumb to have people give money expecting it's going one place and then find out it's not going there. Again, if having basic common sense means you're Skip Bayless then sign me up.
-
It's clear as day that you can't accept payments from boosters as a student athlete. Pretty dumb for Nigel to do just that. But hey, if that makes me Skip Bayless then I'm all for it.
Not to mention it's pretty dumb to have people give money expecting it's going one place and then find out it's not going there. Again, if having basic common sense means you're Skip Bayless then sign me up.
Actually you said that he is "So dumb he can't even get his own (Venmo) username right."
Well it turns out he was two steps ahead of you. He intentionally set it up in a friend's name, AND had decided to donate the proceeds to charity. So one could say, that even if you don't believe that his cause is just, he did bring attention to something he believes it.
Far from "dumb." Far from "a clown."
-
Actually you said that he is "So dumb he can't even get his own (Venmo) username right."
Well it turns out he was two steps ahead of you. He intentionally set it up in a friend's name, AND had decided to donate the proceeds to charity. So one could say, that even if you don't believe that his cause is just, he did bring attention to something he believes it.
Far from "dumb." Far from "a clown."
Well, the step he failed to see in front of him is that people realized that wasn't his username and his username was 1 character short of the same username, so he did, in fact, receive payments. So, he's pretty dumb for taking payments from school boosters. Very illegal by NCAA rules. Very dumb by Nigel.
He's also very dumb for telling people to Venmo money to an account that he was implying was his, when it wasn't his. And for failing to tell people where that money would actually (supposedly) end up. If I'm agreeing to donate my own money (that I worked for and didn't simply ask for someone to send me for nothing) then I would expect that money to go where that person said it was going. If I decided giving Nigel Hayes money for no reason at all was a worthy cause, I would expect the money to go there and remain there. Finding out hours later that, "Hey, this isn't my username you sent the money to, and this isn't where the money will be going," that's called a scam. Maybe some people wanted their money going to Nigel but have no interest in donating money to the Boys and Girl's Club of Dane County. Maybe if they wanted to donate their money to the Boys and Girl's Club of Dane County they would've done so with a check themselves so they could take a tax deduction for their gift, but now Nigel gets to be the one putting his name on a check with (supposedly) all the money he (and his buddy, since both accounts got payments) collected.
Dumb. Very dumb.
-
Back to the point at hand, I can't believe these student athletes live such an impoverished lifestyle. Flying all over the country on private jets to play a game. So taken advantage of...
::)
-
Well, the step he failed to see in front of him is that people realized that wasn't his username and his username was 1 character short of the same username, so he did, in fact, receive payments. So, he's pretty dumb for taking payments from school boosters. Very illegal by NCAA rules. Very dumb by Nigel.
He's also very dumb for telling people to Venmo money to an account that he was implying was his, when it wasn't his. And for failing to tell people where that money would actually (supposedly) end up. If I'm agreeing to donate my own money (that I worked for and didn't simply ask for someone to send me for nothing) then I would expect that money to go where that person said it was going. If I decided giving Nigel Hayes money for no reason at all was a worthy cause, I would expect the money to go there and remain there. Finding out hours later that, "Hey, this isn't my username you sent the money to, and this isn't where the money will be going," that's called a scam. Maybe some people wanted their money going to Nigel but have no interest in donating money to the Boys and Girl's Club of Dane County. Maybe if they wanted to donate their money to the Boys and Girl's Club of Dane County they would've done so with a check themselves so they could take a tax deduction for their gift, but now Nigel gets to be the one putting his name on a check with (supposedly) all the money he (and his buddy, since both accounts got payments) collected.
Dumb. Very dumb.
Skip doubles down despite the fact that his initial allegations were false. Shift the goalposts. Insult some more.
Oh well. Not surprised.
-
Skip doubles down despite the fact that his initial allegations were false. Shift the goalposts. Insult some more.
Oh well. Not surprised.
What's false? What shifted? Just curious...
Do yourself a favor. Check on Nigel Hayes's account activity. Let me know if he's received payments or not.
Talking just to talk. Haven't actually looked into it. Also no surprise.
-
But, according to Sultan, his account isn't accepting any payments. Venmo is just glitching out, or something.
-
Back to the point at hand, I can't believe these student athletes live such an impoverished lifestyle. Flying all over the country on private jets to play a game. So taken advantage of...
::)
Why is it, do you think, college athletic departments have the resources to use private jets?
Could it be, oh I don't know, they generate billions of dollars in revenue largely through the efforts of a labor force that's woefully underpaid via artificial means?
-
With a graduation rate near zero for African American, St. Bo recruited players, what is the value of an athlete's scholarship? Quit the scam, pay the players, and get their income on the tax roles. Similarly, charge them rent for these riduclous publicly funded athletic dorms.
-
Why is it, do you think, college athletic departments have the resources to use private jets?
Could it be, oh I don't know, they generate billions of dollars in revenue largely through the efforts of a labor force that's woefully underpaid via artificial means?
With a graduation rate near zero for African American, St. Bo recruited players, what is the value of an athlete's scholarship? Quit the scam, pay the players, and get their income on the tax roles. Similarly, charge them rent for these riduclous publicly funded athletic dorms.
Okay. So you simply want the athletes to be compensated what "market value" says they're worth. So only the top athletes at the top football and basketball programs will be paid anything worth their time. The rest of the student athletes out there? Well, you'll have to take out student loans to pay for your schooling, you won't be able to have a student job because all your "free" time will be dedicated to your sport, yet you still have to find a way to pay for your food, your clothes, your gear, etc. Good luck!
My question now is this. Since we want to pay "market value" to these student athletes, do student athletes on non-revenue sports now have to pay the school to participate in their athletic team, since they are losing the school money and the market says they're a net negative?
Seems absurd to me, but okay!
-
AUDIT
-
Okay. So you simply want the athletes to be compensated what "market value" says they're worth. So only the top athletes at the top football and basketball programs will be paid anything worth their time. The rest of the student athletes out there? Well, you'll have to take out student loans to pay for your schooling, you won't be able to have a student job because all your "free" time will be dedicated to your sport, yet you still have to find a way to pay for your food, your clothes, your gear, etc. Good luck!
My question now is this. Since we want to pay "market value" to these student athletes, do student athletes on non-revenue sports now have to pay the school to participate in their athletic team, since they are losing the school money and the market says they're a net negative?
Seems absurd to me, but okay!
Right ... because that extreme is the only possible alternative.
There's no way the NCAA - which generated $1 billion in revenue in 2014, but apparently is run by very stupid people - could possibly come up with a means to be more equitable with the students who generate those revenues without blowing up all college athletics as we know it.
I mean, it's not like anyone has ever proposed a reasonable plan to better compensate pay athletes without ending college sports.
Oh, wait ...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/09/sports/a-way-to-start-paying-college-athletes.html?_r=0
http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/ncaa-critics-offer-ways-to-pay-college-players/
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-02-11/sports/ct-sherman-media-spt-0212-20140212_1_jay-bilas-ncaa-athletes-espn-college-basketball-analyst
http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/09/how-to-pay-college-athletes-a-three-part-plan/245387/
-
I could hear an argument that college athletes deserve to be paid more. But Hayes is severely undeerrating the value of his experience. He gets a lot more than "just" a scholarship. Room & board, weekly stipend, access to support services not available to non-athlete students, and coaching/training for some of the best in the business.
Hell, just the tuition is about $40,000 a year for Hayes. That's more than most people in the D-League.
-
I could hear an argument that college athletes deserve to be paid more. But Hayes is severely undeerrating the value of his experience. He gets a lot more than "just" a scholarship. Room & board, weekly stipend, access to support services not available to non-athlete students, and coaching/training for some of the best in the business.
Hell, just the tuition is about $40,000 a year for Hayes. That's more than most people in the D-League.
This may very well be true, but even so the value of every benefit Hayes receives is still markedly less than the revenue he produces for Wisconsin.
According to a study a few years back (link below) if there were even just 50-50 revenue sharing in college basketball, the average player would earn more than $266K a year. The average FBS football player would get $114,000 a year. An athletic scholarship is certainly valuable, but it doesn't come close to matching the value players generate for their schools.
http://assets.usw.org/ncpa/pdfs/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Major-Findings.pdf
-
This may very well be true, but even so the value of every benefit Hayes receives is still markedly less than the revenue he produces for Wisconsin.
According to a study a few years back (link below) if there were even just 50-50 revenue sharing in college basketball, the average player would earn more than $266K a year. The average FBS football player would get $114,000 a year. An athletic scholarship is certainly valuable, but it doesn't come close to matching the value players generate for their schools.
http://assets.usw.org/ncpa/pdfs/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Major-Findings.pdf
Isn't that business? I'm pretty sure I generate more value for my company than what they pay me. Don't NBA player generate more money than what the NBA pays them? Honestly asking, I don't know what a good comparison would be.
-
Isn't that business? I'm pretty sure I generate more value for my company than what they pay me. Don't NBA player generate more money than what the NBA pays them? Honestly asking, I don't know what a good comparison would be.
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
It's a very bad deal for them. Put it to you this way ... how many schools do you think would, if given the choice, have players fund 100 percent of their own tuition, food, costs and all their other benefits, in exchange for even a 35-65 split of revenues?
For MU, by the way, that would equate to about $161,000 per player in the 2013-14 season.
-
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
It's a very bad deal for them. Put it to you this way ... how many schools do you think would, if given the choice, have players fund 100 percent of their own tuition, food, costs and all their other benefits, in exchange for even a 35-65 split of revenues?
For MU, by the way, that would equate to about $161,000 per player in the 2013-14 season.
Where will the money come from, the vast majority of Universities lose money on football and basketball and nearly all lose money on athletics.
Should taxpayers foot the bill to provide college athletes with more money? Should tuition go up even more to offset the higher expenses. Or should new facilities, nice travel/accomodations go out the window and go back to kids riding the bus to games and staying at a motel 6, reusing old gear from season to season etc.
-
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
Like a lower level associate at a big law firm, who might be making $80k while partners make millions.
-
This may very well be true, but even so the value of every benefit Hayes receives is still markedly less than the revenue he produces for Wisconsin.
According to a study a few years back (link below) if there were even just 50-50 revenue sharing in college basketball, the average player would earn more than $266K a year. The average FBS football player would get $114,000 a year. An athletic scholarship is certainly valuable, but it doesn't come close to matching the value players generate for their schools.
http://assets.usw.org/ncpa/pdfs/6-Billion-Heist-Study_Major-Findings.pdf
You can imagine this is a hot topic on our message boards. Here is where many of us fall. How can you determine what is the revenue that Hayes specifically produces for our school? The tv money was coming in whether Hayes played for us or not. Fans have been attending games for 75 years, because of the name on the front of the uniform. We watch the teams on tv because of the name on the front of the uniform.
Aren't you also not factoring in the lifetime value of a college degree that is earned?
-
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
It's a very bad deal for them. Put it to you this way ... how many schools do you think would, if given the choice, have players fund 100 percent of their own tuition, food, costs and all their other benefits, in exchange for even a 35-65 split of revenues?
For MU, by the way, that would equate to about $161,000 per player in the 2013-14 season.
I would guess that I make about 10% of the "revenue" I generate for my university. I guess I don't see the issue. To me it seems like normal business. Also like Chicos, I mean, Badgerhoney said, I think people are overestimating how much revenue specific players generate.
-
How much revenue does an NBA 12th man generate? Long snapper? Middle reliever?
Even at the professional level, people are watching by and large for the name on the front of the jersey. So calculating an individual's specific revenue generation is a false metric.
I agree that college athletes are well compensated, but I also think football and basketball players deserve more of the cut. Not sure the best way to go about that or exactly how much each player should get.
-
How much revenue does an NBA 12th man generate? Long snapper? Middle reliever?
Even at the professional level, people are watching by and large for the name on the front of the jersey. So calculating an individual's specific revenue generation is a false metric.
That's exactly right. If you judge Nigel Hayes versus a "replacement scholarship player," he likely doesn't have much marginal value.
-
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
It's a very bad deal for them. Put it to you this way ... how many schools do you think would, if given the choice, have players fund 100 percent of their own tuition, food, costs and all their other benefits, in exchange for even a 35-65 split of revenues?
For MU, by the way, that would equate to about $161,000 per player in the 2013-14 season.
If -- or probably when -- players start getting paid, it's going to come as a rude awakening to many, I suspect. Time will tell how the details will work out and whether revenue sports will have a better deal than non-revenue (and whether starting QBs will have a better deal than third string OL). But I suspect there will be a lot of people -- particularly in non-revenue sports -- who are very unhappy that they traded their full ride in for a minimum wage job.
I'd be surprised if the change to paying players is going to be done on a revenue sharing basis. And for the vast majority of NCAA athletes, revenue sharing would be an absolute disaster.
-
I don't think you are going to see players getting paid more than the total cost of attendance scholarships. The reason is that it fundamentally changes the nature of the relationship to one of employer / employee. The only thing that might change this is if outside legislation changes the nature of intercollegiate athletics.
-
I don't think you are going to see players getting paid more than the total cost of attendance scholarships. The reason is that it fundamentally changes the nature of the relationship to one of employer / employee. The only thing that might change this is if outside legislation changes the nature of intercollegiate athletics.
Agreed. And I think that if the nature of the relationship gets fundamentally changed by outside legislation, the vast majority of college athletes will be very unhappy with where that ends up.
-
Right. But my point is, the value of a scholarship and all the other benefits student athletes receive is far less than even half of what they generate in revenue, like closer to 10 percent of the value they generate.
It's a very bad deal for them. Put it to you this way ... how many schools do you think would, if given the choice, have players fund 100 percent of their own tuition, food, costs and all their other benefits, in exchange for even a 35-65 split of revenues?
For MU, by the way, that would equate to about $161,000 per player in the 2013-14 season.
What's the correct ratio of salary to generated revenue? What about all the money the universities put in to allow the students to put their value on display in front of national audiences and for scouts. All the people that work to promote games, or market players, or even get venues ready for play? What is the economic value of players having access to improve and get an opportunity in to be paid millions in the NBA or NFL? What would he have to pay for the coaching he is receiving from the university or the strength and conditioning staff?
I probably make 10% of the generated revenue for the business I manage, am I being underpaid? I don't think so, especially when you account for the future opportunities my current role will afford me based on experience and knowledge gained as well as people I meet.
Nigel and the folks who advocate for his side may not like the equation or would like it to be more tangible but I don't think there is any way you can argue that student athletes are given a raw deal in terms of pure economic compensation for services rendered.
-
Where will the money come from, the vast majority of Universities lose money on football and basketball and nearly all lose money on athletics.
Right, largely because they're bloated bureaucracies that spend excessively on coaches, administration and facilities.
The NYT story I linked above suggests a plan to pay players more equitably that would cost football programs $3 million a year and basketball programs $650K a year. That's not the kind of money that should make or break a program. And if it does, maybe the program shouldn't exist.
Should taxpayers foot the bill to provide college athletes with more money? Should tuition go up even more to offset the higher expenses. Or should new facilities, nice travel/accomodations go out the window and go back to kids riding the bus to games and staying at a motel 6, reusing old gear from season to season etc.
No. No. No.
These are all false choices, though. There are ways to better compensate the players without such draconian measures. The problem is, the people in charge don't want to give up their bloat and so have convinced a too substantial part of the public that giving players a small piece of the pie would mean doom.
-
What's the correct ratio of salary to generated revenue? What about all the money the universities put in to allow the students to put their value on display in front of national audiences and for scouts. All the people that work to promote games, or market players, or even get venues ready for play? What is the economic value of players having access to improve and get an opportunity in to be paid millions in the NBA or NFL? What would he have to pay for the coaching he is receiving from the university or the strength and conditioning staff?
I probably make 10% of the generated revenue for the business I manage, am I being underpaid? I don't think so, especially when you account for the future opportunities my current role will afford me based on experience and knowledge gained as well as people I meet.
Nigel and the folks who advocate for his side may not like the equation or would like it to be more tangible but I don't think there is any way you can argue that student athletes are given a raw deal in terms of pure economic compensation for services rendered.
Of course they can make that argument, and of course you can put a value on the players.
They've managed to do just that in the NBA, NFL and NHL. Why would the NCAA be any different?
The NFL has decided that the players' value is 48.5 percent of revenues. In the NBA it's 51.5 percent. In the NHL it's 50 percent.
At big time programs, scholarship costs are typically less than 10 percent of revenues, often less.
How can anyone look at those numbers and say the players aren't getting a raw deal in terms of pure economic compensation for services rendered?
-
How much revenue does an NBA 12th man generate? Long snapper? Middle reliever?
Even at the professional level, people are watching by and large for the name on the front of the jersey. So calculating an individual's specific revenue generation is a false metric.
I agree that college athletes are well compensated, but I also think football and basketball players deserve more of the cut. Not sure the best way to go about that or exactly how much each player should get.
Correct, which is why you can't do it by individual, but collectively .... just like the NBA, NHL and NFL do.
-
Of course they can make that argument, and of course you can put a value on the players.
They've managed to do just that in the NBA, NFL and NHL. Why would the NCAA be any different?
The NFL has decided that the players' value is 48.5 percent of revenues. In the NBA it's 51.5 percent. In the NHL it's 50 percent.
At big time programs, scholarship costs are typically less than 10 percent of revenues, often less.
How can anyone look at those numbers and say the players aren't getting a raw deal in terms of pure economic compensation for services rendered?
The 12th man on a division one basketball scholarship brings in more money than what his tuition, room and board, food, clothes, health care, travel, shoes, etc. cost? I have a hard time buying that.
-
Of course they can make that argument, and of course you can put a value on the players.
They've managed to do just that in the NBA, NFL and NHL. Why would the NCAA be any different?
The NFL has decided that the players' value is 48.5 percent of revenues. In the NBA it's 51.5 percent. In the NHL it's 50 percent.
At big time programs, scholarship costs are typically less than 10 percent of revenues, often less.
How can anyone look at those numbers and say the players aren't getting a raw deal in terms of pure economic compensation for services rendered?
I can easily do it, because people like Nigel aren't accounting for the economic compensation they are receiving in less tangible assets than scholarship money. Here is a brief list(and not exhaustive) of things Nigel has access to as part of his "compensation" package, which I don't think you are taking into account as part of your 10% ratio.
-Education
-Tutoring
-Food
-Lodging
-Strength and conditioning
-Advanced coaching
-Athletic facilities for practice
-Clothing
-Equipment
-Exposure to professional scouts
-Experiences, in the form of travel to various places that is paid for
-Access to celebrities
-Access to a network of alumni that regular students likely don't have
etc
If the argument is that they could be compensated more, I wouldn't argue against that, especially if video games were still being made off of their likeness. However it hardly enters into the realm of a raw deal. I think they are fairly compensated right now.
-
I can definitely hear arguments about weekly stipends being increased, things like textbooks getting covered, and allowing players to profit off their likenesses (e.g. video games). But I don't see a good reason to switch to a pay for play system. I think players are more than fairly compensated.
On the video games, I think they could handle it like they do the Olympics. College athletes who win medals in the Olympics are given thousands of dollars in prize money. That money sits in a bank account they can't access until they graduate and then it is transferred to them to avoid NCAA restrictions. Set up a similar system for video games and other similar business opportunities. The president of EA Sports has already said that they are more than happy to pay college athletes for their likenesses. It's the NCAA that's saying no.
-
I can easily do it, because people like Nigel aren't accounting for the economic compensation they are receiving in less tangible assets than scholarship money. Here is a brief list(and not exhaustive) of things Nigel has access to as part of his "compensation" package, which I don't think you are taking into account as part of your 10% ratio.
-Education
-Tutoring
-Food
-Lodging
-Strength and conditioning
-Advanced coaching
-Athletic facilities for practice
-Clothing
-Equipment
-Exposure to professional scouts
-Experiences, in the form of travel to various places that is paid for
-Access to celebrities
-Access to a network of alumni that regular students likely don't have
etc
If the argument is that they could be compensated more, I wouldn't argue against that, especially if video games were still being made off of their likeness. However it hardly enters into the realm of a raw deal. I think they are fairly compensated right now.
I think we, respectfully, have very different ideas about who benefits from the college sports system and what qualifies as compensation.
Arguing that a players are "compensated" via coaching, conditioning and facilities, etc., misses the point entirely, IMO. Those things don't exist for the players' benefit. They exist for the programs' benefit.
Your position is akin to arguing that a widget factory exists primarily to help a widget salesman sell widgets. No. The factory - like the sales force - exists to help the company profit. Coaches, facilities, trainers, tutors etc., don't exist to for the sake of players, they exist to help the program profit.
Because in order to succeed and generate revenues, players need to be fed and coached and have a place to practice. The schools aren't providing these things out of the kindness of their hearts or because they care about the players well-being. They're doing it because they believe it ultimately helps their bottom lines.
Do you consider the pens, paper, computer, desks, phones and vending machines you use at work to be "compensation?" Is your supervisor* part of your compensation? Are they listed on your 1040?
# = If you have one.
-
I think we, respectfully, have very different ideas about who benefits from the college sports system and what qualifies as compensation.
Arguing that a players are "compensated" via coaching, conditioning and facilities, etc., misses the point entirely, IMO. Those things don't exist for the players' benefit. They exist for the programs' benefit.
Your position is akin to arguing that a widget factory exists primarily to help a widget salesman sell widgets. No. The factory - like the sales force - exists to help the company profit. Coaches, facilities, trainers, tutors etc., don't exist to for the sake of players, they exist to help the program profit.
Schools don't feed players, coach players and give players a locker room for the sake of the players. It's done for sake of the athletic department/university. Because in order to succeed and generate revenues, players need to be fed and coached and have a place to practice. The schools aren't providing these things out of the kindness of their hearts or because they care about the players well-being. They're doing it because they believe it ultimately helps their bottom lines.
Do you consider the pens, paper, computer, desks, phones and vending machines you use at work to be "compensation?" Is your supervisor* part of your compensation? Are they listed on your 1040?
# = If you have one.
Isn't that the same as every money making organization out there? Does a company train its employees so the employee can become more qualified and go do better work elsewhere for a competitor if that employee so chooses, or does a company train its employees so they can do good work for its company so the company can make more money? College coaches coach up their players for the benefit of the program so that the school can make more money, but professional coaches coach up their athletes for the benefit of the individual athlete? Uhh, okay?
That's how the world works. If the student athletes don't like that they're forced to take an education rather than money, go ahead and travel overseas or join the D League and you can get take the money and pay for your living, food, clothes, etc.
-
I think we, respectfully, have very different ideas about who benefits from the college sports system and what qualifies as compensation.
Arguing that a players are "compensated" via coaching, conditioning and facilities, etc., misses the point entirely, IMO. Those things don't exist for the players' benefit. They exist for the programs' benefit.
You're position is akin to arguing that a widget factory exists to help a widget salesman sell widgets. No. The factory - like the sales force - exists to help the company profit. Schools don't feed players, coach players and give players a locker room for the sake of the players. It's done for sake of the athletic department/university. Because in order to succeed and generate revenues, players need to be fed and coached and have a place to practice. The schools aren't providing these things out of the kindness of their hearts or because they care about the players well-being. They're doing it because they believe it ultimately helps their bottom lines.
Do you consider the pens, paper, computer, desks, phones and vending machines you use at work to be "compensation?" Is your supervisor* part of your compensation? Are they listed on your 1040?
# = If you have one.
If my company pays for me to get an MBA or be trained on something universal like pragmatic marketing or whatever....that's for the company but I definitely get benefit from it as well. I can put it on my resume and increase my market value on it. At the end of the day, I don't care who "it's for" if you are getting benefit out of it, it is an advantage for you. Do regular students get access to any of those things? There is a reason that universities pour money into things like locker rooms, the athletes care, so it's a recruiting tool. If the athletes care, they are benefiting from it.
So you don't learn anything from your boss that you can apply at other companies potentially? You wouldn't find it beneficial to work at a company that has the latest technology that makes your life better? Maybe you don't, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean you aren't gaining advantages by that.
-
Isn't that the same as every money making organization out there? Does a company train its employees so the employee can become more qualified and go do better work elsewhere for a competitor if that employee so chooses, or does a company train its employees so they can do good work for its company so the company can make more money?
Of course it is.
Except the NCAA and colleges insist they are not "money-making organizations" and college athletes are not "employees." Just ask them.
Seems like you want it both ways. You want the NCAA and schools to be nonprofit organizations with all the benefits that entails ... and yet want them to seek profit and treat students as if they are employees, but without giving those students the same rights as employees.
Hmmm. And some have to gall to claim the system is rigged.
College coaches coach up their players for the benefit of the program, but professional coaches coach up their athletes for the benefit of the individual athlete? Uhh, okay?
I said this? Anyone said this?
That's how the world works. If the student athletes don't like that they're forced to take an education rather than money, go ahead and travel overseas or join the D League and you can get take the money and pay for your living, food, clothes, etc.
The NCAA ... love it or leave it!
Or, you know, the players can use their leverage and platform to fight for a more equitable system. Isn't that the American way?
-
If my company pays for me to get an MBA or be trained on something universal like pragmatic marketing or whatever....that's for the company but I definitely get benefit from it as well. I can put it on my resume and increase my market value on it. At the end of the day, I don't care who "it's for" if you are getting benefit out of it, it is an advantage for you. Do regular students get access to any of those things? There is a reason that universities pour money into things like locker rooms, the athletes care, so it's a recruiting tool. If the athletes care, they are benefiting from it.
So you don't learn anything from your boss that you can apply at other companies potentially? You wouldn't find it beneficial to work at a company that has the latest technology that makes your life better? Maybe you don't, and that's fine, but that doesn't mean you aren't gaining advantages by that.
Respectfully, you're shifting the goalposts here.
What you previously labeled as "player compensation," i.e. coaching, the use of a locker room, food, you're now admitting are things that exist for the program's sake, but a player benefits from them indirectly.
Either way, it doesn't really matter. We fundamentally disagree, it appears, on the purpose of big-time college athletics.
-
Of course it is.
Except the NCAA and colleges insist they are not "money-making organizations" and college athletes are not "employees." Just as them.
Seems like you want it both ways. You want the NCAA and schools to be nonprofit organizations with all the benefits that entails ... and yet want them to seek profit and treat students as if they are employees, but without giving those students the same rights as employees.
Hmmm. And some have to gall to claim the system is rigged.
I said this? Anyone said this?
The NCAA ... love it or leave it!
Or, you know, the players can use their leverage and platform to fight for a more equitable system.
I couldn't care less if the NCAA makes money. They should make money. The student athletes benefit greatly (whether or not you want to admit they do) and the NCAA benefits greatly. Good for them both.
Then what's your point talking about coaches being in place to benefit the school/program and not the student athlete? That's just how it goes. High school coaches coach up their players to win. The horror! College coaches coach up their program to win, so that they get NCAA Tournament shares, more butts in their seats, etc. How could they possibly take advantage of these kids like that?! If you don't think the student athletes are benefiting from receiving the best coaching in the business, then I'm not sure what else there is to say.
Problem for the players is that they've "used their leverage and platform to fight for a more equitable system" for years...and nothing has changed. Maybe people don't think the system is broken? Maybe some people actually understand the value of a college degree and 0 student loans?
-
Of course it is.
Except the NCAA and colleges insist they are not "money-making organizations" and college athletes are not "employees." Just as them.
Seems like you want it both ways. You want the NCAA and schools to be nonprofit organizations with all the benefits that entails ... and yet want them to seek profit and treat students as if they are employees, but without giving those students the same rights as employees.
Hmmm. And some have to gall to claim the system is rigged.
Whether it's non-profit or not has nothing to do with how it works. Hospitals are non-profit but they still provide training for their employees that is transferable to other employers.
Yours seems to be a largely semantical one. I'm fine calling the athletes employees, doesn't change that I think they are fairly* compensated for their revenue generation.
*If they can get more compensation then they do now by some means (organization, protest, whatever) than so be it. That new level would be fair compensation....but I don't think you can say they aren't fairly compensated right now.
-
Respectfully, you're shifting the goalposts here.
What you previously labeled as "player compensation," i.e. coaching, the use of a locker room, food, you're now admitting are things that exist for the program's sake, but a player benefits from them indirectly.
Either way, it doesn't really matter. We fundamentally disagree, it appears, on the purpose of big-time college athletics.
I don't think I am. Big-time athletics are to promote the university and generate revenue. Players are compensated as part of that in often non-monetary ways. Big time athletics are no different than non-profit or even profit driven companies just the mechanism of how they compensate their companies can be different as far as the mix of non-monetary/monetary compensation.
If your argument to my point was that I implied that player compensation includes strength and conditioning as a direct benefit as opposed to an indirect benefit, you are correct I did not make that level of distinction until your argument back. Doesn't mean I'm shifting goal posts, just a clarification.
-
I couldn't care less if the NCAA makes money. They should make money. The student athletes benefit greatly (whether or not you want to admit they do) and the NCAA benefits greatly. Good for them both.
Then what's your point talking about coaches being in place to benefit the school/program and not the student athlete? That's just how it goes. High school coaches coach up their players to win. The horror! College coaches coach up their program to win, so that they get NCAA Tournament shares, more butts in their seats, etc. How could they possibly take advantage of these kids like that?! If you don't think the student athletes are benefiting from receiving the best coaching in the business, then I'm not sure what else there is to say.
Problem for the players is that they've "used their leverage and platform to fight for a more equitable system" for years...and nothing has changed. Maybe people don't think the system is broken? Maybe some people actually understand the value of a college degree and 0 student loans?
Yes, it's obvious you don't care.
Nothing has changed?
Hmmm.
In landmark action for major-college sports, schools and athlete representatives from the NCAA's five wealthiest conferences on Saturday voted 79-1 to expand what Division I schools can provide under an athletic scholarship.
The vote, taken during the NCAA's annual convention, redefines an athletic scholarship so that it can cover not only the traditional tuition, room, board, books and fees, but also the incidental costs of attending college. That means a scholarship will now be able to pay for items including transportation and miscellaneous personal expenses.
Conservatively this means Division I men's and women's athletes collectively stand to gain at least $50 million a year in additional benefits.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/17/ncaa-convention-cost-of-attendance-student-athletes-scholarships/21921073/
For the first time, the NCAA this year is allowing schools to give cash stipends to cover the cost of things like late-night snacks, student fees, laundry money and movies.
Scholarships cover the core expenses of college such as tuition and room and board. The new stipends are supposed to close the gap between scholarship money and what it actually costs to attend school.
The stipends, available at most of the country major sports programs, range from about $2,000 to $5,000 a year, although some schools are reportedly offering a few thousand more than that. That may not sound like a lot, but that's real money for students from poorer families.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/04/news/companies/extra-cash-college-athletes/
And, don't worry, these changes are just the beginning. Whether you believe (or like) it or not, the momentum is heavily in favor of more compensation for athletes. The NCAA wouldn't be doing this if the pressure from its athletes, the public and from within the institutions themselves weren't mounting.
-
What's the going rate for a high-volume 41.2 eFG% guy?
-
I guess a simple solution is just allow players to receive outside payments but make them report everything they receive. Make some limitations like no payments from known felons, tobacco, alcohol companies and gambling sites. That takes away from a lot of shady characters. Universities will lose some endorsements that are shifted to players but aren't liable to Pay hundreds of athletes. It also avoids the delemna of splitting revenues from a star kicker and other players.
It would throw the balance of power to universities with powerful alumni but so be it. Does it really matter if schools like Marquette can't keep up?
-
I guess a simple solution is just allow players to receive outside payments but make them report everything they receive. Make some limitations like no payments from known felons, tobacco, alcohol companies and gambling sites. That takes away from a lot of shady characters. Universities will lose some endorsements that are shifted to players but aren't liable to Pay hundreds of athletes. It also avoids the delemna of splitting revenues from a star kicker and other players.
It would throw the balance of power to universities with powerful alumni but so be it. Does it really matter if schools like Marquette can't keep up?
I really like the idea of getting money for outside of the sport activities like video game likeness, etc but having it put into a trust for after they graduate. Even if some powerful alumni wants to game the system by paying the player through some endorsement it's after the fact and not something they can do directly.
-
The 12th man on a division one basketball scholarship brings in more money than what his tuition, room and board, food, clothes, health care, travel, shoes, etc. cost? I have a hard time buying that.
.
Ah, there's the rub. The 12th man generates nothing, his value to the bottom line is zero. Truth is the top players get ripped off and the scrubs are overpaid if the payment is a full scholarship.
-
I really like the idea of getting money for outside of the sport activities like video game likeness, etc but having it put into a trust for after they graduate. Even if some powerful alumni wants to game the system by paying the player through some endorsement it's after the fact and not something they can do directly.
Is there anything wrong with powerful alumni throwing money at kids? As long as its reported to make sure nothing shady is going on, I don't see a problem with it.
-
SwaggyDu sharing his opinion--
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
I got a son and I'm a student athlete yet I'll never complain or say I'm broke. Where I'm from it's a blessing to even get a free education.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
It's a shame seeing people do these stunts for social media attention. That's really corny and sad. Our generation so unappreciative.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
Don't say you're broke unless your account says $0.00... I know people that's really out here struggling for a meal yet a dollar.
-
Refreshing from Duane.
-
SwaggyDu sharing his opinion--
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
I got a son and I'm a student athlete yet I'll never complain or say I'm broke. Where I'm from it's a blessing to even get a free education.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
It's a shame seeing people do these stunts for social media attention. That's really corny and sad. Our generation so unappreciative.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
Don't say you're broke unless your account says $0.00... I know people that's really out here struggling for a meal yet a dollar.
Said by someone who knows a lot more about the work and its rewards than those of us here on Scoop.
Huge respect.
-
SwaggyDu sharing his opinion--
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
I got a son and I'm a student athlete yet I'll never complain or say I'm broke. Where I'm from it's a blessing to even get a free education.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
It's a shame seeing people do these stunts for social media attention. That's really corny and sad. Our generation so unappreciative.
Duane Wilson @SwaggyDu1
Don't say you're broke unless your account says $0.00... I know people that's really out here struggling for a meal yet a dollar.
Awesome. I've had my qualms with some of his decisions on the court. He is now my favorite Warrior. Someone who gets it.
-
I think these guys should get more, but it's nice to see the gratitude from Duane. He's always been a solid kid, I sure hope he can break through a bit this year on the court.
-
Would walk-ons be paid more than scholarship athletes?
-
I attempted to do a bit of looking into how much "college athletes should be paid". I will admit the methodology I have used is not perfect, but it is what I could do that didn't take a ton of time and used very readily available information.
I used the following table of revenues and expenses posted by the NCAA for 2014-2015 for the public schools (they mention over 225).
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances
This link breaks down what they consider as revenues and expenses. Note that revenues does include contributions to fund athletic programs. I am sure that some of the accounting here can get a little fuzzy, especially around allocations for overhead and G&A, but take it for what its worth.
http://sports.usatoday.com/2016/04/14/methodology-for-ncaa-athletic-department-revenue-database/
Using that table, I found that for all the public schools across all sports, there is a net operating revenue of about $300 million. I then divided that by 2 to get to an athlete's "share" of $150m if we want to do a 50/50 split (which IMO seems a bit much).
Using information from the following link, I estimated that there are about 65,800 scholarship athletes for Division I Public Schools. (176,000 student-athletes multiplied by 56% receiving athletics aid multiplied by 231 public schools in the above table used divided by 346 schools noted in the link below)
https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Recruiting%20Fact%20Sheet%20WEB.pdf
Dividing the $150m by the 65,800 scholarship athletes gets us to each athlete receiving $2,275/year in compensation.
I used total athletes instead of the revenue-generating sports as other programs are subsidized by the revenue generating sports. Additionally, there are some programs in traditional "non-revenue sports" (ie. lacrosse, hockey, etc.) for some schools that actually do turn a profit as opposed to other programs. There was also no way (using the information I used, there may be something out there that I didn't incorporate) to segment each of the sports. So in this instance, all sports share revenues and expenses when in turn both revenues and expenses will vary from sport to sport. Additionally, some athletes (based on the sport they are in), receive better benefits than others. Examples of this include training facilities, exposure, travel, etc and to the more extreme cases such as the Kentucky basketball dorms.
To build on this further, I think there is an argument that non-scholarship athletes deserve to be paid as well. There are many examples of non-scholarship athletes performing at a high level across the NCAA (the most famous example being Doug McDermott), if we do not allow them to be paid, then how do we decide who gets paid what amounts (I think this goes back to the earlier conversation of starting QB vs 3rd string OL) and when is that decision made? What if someone performs much, much better than expected during the year (ie., Frank Kaminsky his Junior Year), do they deserve to be paid more? (flip side, disappointing seasons by individual athletes)
I know my quick analysis above is far from perfect, but I think it helps build a little context.
-
I've always thought it would be interesting to tell the players that they can choose...
A) Full scholarship: tuition, room and board, stipend, etc.
B) Fixed annual salary ($25k?) then pay your own way.
Obviously there are all kinds of flaws with the set-up (i.e. different tuition costs, etc) but it could be eye-opening for a lot of these athletes to realize just how valuable that free education actually is.
-
I've always thought it would be interesting to tell the players that they can choose...
A) Full scholarship: tuition, room and board, stipend, etc.
B) Fixed annual salary ($25k?) then pay your own way.
Obviously there are all kinds of flaws with the set-up (i.e. different tuition costs, etc) but it could be eye-opening for a lot of these athletes to realize just how valuable that free education actually is.
Not just the free education and a lot of the other benefits that others have pointed out. But the coaching and exposure is insanely valuable.
What platforms are other students given in front of potential employers to see their work directly? I definitely didn't have that as an accounting student. I could go get an internship with a firm that gave that firm and that firm only some insight into my skills and what I was capable of.
-
I've always thought it would be interesting to tell the players that they can choose...
A) Full scholarship: tuition, room and board, stipend, etc.
B) Fixed annual salary ($25k?) then pay your own way.
Obviously there are all kinds of flaws with the set-up (i.e. different tuition costs, etc) but it could be eye-opening for a lot of these athletes to realize just how valuable that free education actually is.
I can honestly see a situation in the not-so-distant future where athletes are deemed employees by the NLRB and/or the DOL. If that happens, it will not be surprising to me at all if most schools pull their scholarships and put them on a wage that is far below what they've been getting all these years. Athletes (and parents) across the country would be very upset. Be careful what you wish for. If this ever happens, athletes with great academic records will be in high demand.
-
Not to get political, but on CNN's post-debate coverage at UNLV, some guy was holding up a sign that said something like "I'm a random college student - go fund me."