Mick Cronin says players "need" to get paid

[kryza]

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20121215/SPT0101/312150052/After-silence-about-realignment-Cronin-erupts

[Groin_pull]

With these BILLION dollar TV deals, he's right.

[NavinRJohnson]

Have felt the same way for years. Ridiculous that they aren't paid.

[Pakuni]

Have felt the same way for years. Ridiculous that they aren't paid.

They are paid, just not in cash.
USA Today did a study last year that found the value of a Division I scholarship for one year is worth as much as $140,000. So a kid who sticks around four years gets more than a half million dollars of value out of it, not to mention the highest level of training possible to potentially earn even more in the professional ranks. Not suggesting they don't earn that, but let's not pretend they're getting nothing out of it.

Also, given that most athletics programs barely break even, if that, how do you propose to pay these kids? Can't pay them with money that doesn't exist.


http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2011-value-of-college-scholarship.htm

[wiscwarrior]

They are paid, just not in cash.
USA Today did a study last year that found the value of a Division I scholarship for one year is worth as much as $140,000. So a kid who sticks around four years gets more than a half million dollars of value out of it, not to mention the highest level of training possible to potentially earn even more in the professional ranks. Not suggesting they don't earn that, but let's not pretend they're getting nothing out of it.

Also, given that most athletics programs barely break even, if that, how do you propose to pay these kids? Can't pay them with money that doesn't exist.


http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2011-value-of-college-scholarship.htm

Incidental money for miscellaneous student expenses should be included in scholarship. Money should come from the conferences or the NCAA from TV rights before being distributed to the individual schools. This makes the payout equal across all schools.

[77fan88warrior]

And what are you going to pay non-revenue producing sport's student athletes?

[Pakuni]

Incidental money for miscellaneous student expenses should be included in scholarship. Money should come from the conferences or the NCAA from TV rights before being distributed to the individual schools. This makes the payout equal across all schools.

The NCAA is working on a plan to give scholarship athletes a $2,000 annual stipend. There are issues still to be worked out, such as whether it should only go to students who can show need (i.e. does the swimmer whose parents earn six figures really need it?) and how to handle kids on partial scholarship, but it's coming eventually.

[NavinRJohnson]

And what are you going to pay non-revenue producing sport's student athletes?

An amount commensurate with what they bring in. Why should someone on MU's soccer team, be paid the same as Vander Blue, or someone on TA&M's swim team be paid the same as Johnny Manziel? Those guys named in the major sports are already carrying the load for those non-revenue producing sports, and so much more.

[NavinRJohnson]

Not suggesting they don't earn that, but let's not pretend they're getting nothing out of it.

Who's pretending that? I am just sick and tired of the hypocritical NcAA/university presidents who could give a rip about the athletes beyond what it means to their bottom line, and continue institute rules, policies and actions that consistently demonstrate as much.

These athletes generate billions of dollars. I think it is the restrictions placed upon them in terms of movement, etc. that bothers me most, while the coaches, ADs etc. who's salary they earn, are free to come and go as they please to the highest bidder.

[ChicosBailBonds]

With these BILLION dollar TV deals, he's right.

Then enjoy another basketball program because MU and many others will no longer be playing.

Those BILLION deals pay for a lot of things, including all the non-revenue sports championships.  And a note to Mick, as soon as you pay the men's team, you have to pay the women's volleyball team, the women's soccer team, the cross country team, etc.  Then its all over.

[ChicosBailBonds]

An amount commensurate with what they bring in. Why should someone on MU's soccer team, be paid the same as Vander Blue, or someone on TA&M's swim team be paid the same as Johnny Manziel? Those guys named in the major sports are already carrying the load for those non-revenue producing sports, and so much more.

Using that argument, the Wisconsin basketball player should be paid more than the Marquette basketball player.  Since they bring in more.  Sure you want to go down that path?

Who's pretending that? I am just sick and tired of the hypocritical NcAA/university presidents who could give a rip about the athletes beyond what it means to their bottom line, and continue institute rules, policies and actions that consistently demonstrate as much.

These athletes generate billions of dollars. I think it is the restrictions placed upon them in terms of movement, etc. that bothers me most, while the coaches, ADs etc. who's salary they earn, are free to come and go as they please to the highest bidder.

You are painting with an incredibly broad brush.  The NCAA has three divisions, 450,000 athletes, all but two sports lose money.  You're focusing on a handful of athletic departments that make money and defining the entire NCAA based on the few.  Most do not fit the description you are deploying.

[Pakuni]

An amount commensurate with what they bring in. Why should someone on MU's soccer team, be paid the same as Vander Blue, or someone on TA&M's swim team be paid the same as Johnny Manziel? Those guys named in the major sports are already carrying the load for those non-revenue producing sports, and so much more.

So would the athletes in sports that lose money (aka most college athletes) be required to pay for the privilege to play?


More seriously, Title IX would have something to say about your plan.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Who's pretending that? I am just sick and tired of the hypocritical NcAA/university presidents who could give a rip about the athletes beyond what it means to their bottom line, and continue institute rules, policies and actions that consistently demonstrate as much.

These athletes generate billions of dollars. I think it is the restrictions placed upon them in terms of movement, etc. that bothers me most, while the coaches, ADs etc. who's salary they earn, are free to come and go as they please to the highest bidder.

To be fair, the players don't have to accept a scholarship and go to school.

They can play a sport that doesn't require college (tennis, boxing, etc.) or accept the system as it stands.

I'm not saying the system is correct, but the idea that the players are martyrs is incorrect. They have other choices.

[wiscwarrior]

Then enjoy another basketball program because MU and many others will no longer be playing.

Those BILLION deals pay for a lot of things, including all the non-revenue sports championships.  And a note to Mick, as soon as you pay the men's team, you have to pay the women's volleyball team, the women's soccer team, the cross country team, etc.  Then its all over.

You know actually maybe it should be over It really has become hypocritical when coaches make six and seven figures and athletes can't get "walk around" money. It has to be tough for some student athletes on scholarship to keep up with the average student financially when, I believe, they are not allowed to earn any money for incidentals while on scholarship

[ChicosBailBonds]

Do some of you even know how the money is spent in the NCAA? 

[Pakuni]

Who's pretending that? I am just sick and tired of the hypocritical NcAA/university presidents who could give a rip about the athletes beyond what it means to their bottom line, and continue institute rules, policies and actions that consistently demonstrate as much.

These athletes generate billions of dollars. I think it is the restrictions placed upon them in terms of movement, etc. that bothers me most, while the coaches, ADs etc. who's salary they earn, are free to come and go as they please to the highest bidder.

I think you're conflating revenues with profits.
Yes, college athletics earn a lot of revenue. They also cost a lot of money, and the programs that actually earn profits off them are generally few and far between. In fact, many college athletics departments remain afloat only because they are subsidized to the tune of millions of dollars by fees imposed on the non-athletes.

While many Division I men's basketball and football teams make a profit, students still wind up subsidizing the overall costs of big-time athletic programs. In 2010, 46 of 53 public universities surveyed by Bloomberg diverted money to fund sports programs. School subsidies and student fees made up 21 percent of the $6.3 billion in athletic revenue at the NCAA's 120 largest programs. That was the largest share since 2004.

http://www.bloomberg.com/consumer-spending/2012-03-21/the-real-cost-of-march-madness.html#slide3

And I don't think it's fair to suggest players "earn" the coaches their salaries. College coaches, especially at  big-time programs, work their a**es off.

[NavinRJohnson]

Then enjoy another basketball program because MU and many others will no longer be playing.

Those BILLION deals pay for a lot of things, including all the non-revenue sports championships.  And a note to Mick, as soon as you pay the men's team, you have to pay the women's volleyball team, the women's soccer team, the cross country team, etc.  Then its all over.

And maybe it should be all over. If someone can explain to me why those other teams should be paid anything, let alone anything near what the men's team deserves, as some would argue they are now in terms of the scholarship benefits, etc., I'm all ears.

While I understand how people, like most here, rationalize it away because they want their college football, and basketball, and they want to see their team in the NCAA tournament, etc., so they aren't bothered by the fact that all of that money as you accurately point out is earned entirely by a small percentage, yet that small percentage receive little in the way of additional benefit, while the school and the remaining percentage receive a hugely disporortionate amount.

I am admittedly part of the problem, as I continue to plunk down for season tickets, watch game aft game, etc., but it gets harder all the time.

[Pakuni]

You know actually maybe it should be over It really has become hypocritical when coaches make six and seven figures and athletes can't get "walk around" money. It has to be tough for some student athletes on scholarship to keep up with the average student financially when, I believe, they are not allowed to earn any money for incidentals while on scholarship

But on the flip side, regular students don't get tuition, housing, food, clothing and medical care for free. I'm pretty sure most would trade the ability to work on campus in exchange for  free everything  else (and freedom from sometimes crushing debt once they graduate).
Student athletes really aren't the victims they're often portrayed as.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

And maybe it should be all over. If someone can explain to me why those other teams should be paid anything, let alone anything near what the men's team deserves, as some would argue they are now in terms of the scholarship benefits, etc., I'm all ears.

While I understand how people, like most here, rationalize it away because they want their college football, and basketball, and they want to see their team in the NCAA tournament, etc., so they aren't bothered by the fact that all of that money as you accurately point out is earned entirely by a small percentage, yet that small percentage receive little in the way of additional benefit, while the school and the remaining percentage receive a hugely disporortionate amount.

I am admittedly part of the problem, as I continue to plunk down for season tickets, watch game aft game, etc., but it gets harder all the time.

As long as kids accept scholarships, schools will keep operating in such a manner. If you can start a minor league football league and pay kids right out of HS, you might make a dent in the NCAA.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You know actually maybe it should be over It really has become hypocritical when coaches make six and seven figures and athletes can't get "walk around" money. It has to be tough for some student athletes on scholarship to keep up with the average student financially when, I believe, they are not allowed to earn any money for incidentals while on scholarship

To an extent, yes, but again, painting with a broad brush.  Of the 350 DI basketball coaches, how many of them make 7 figure salaries?  Of the DII and DIII coaches...how many? (ZERO).  The NCAA isn't just about Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA and Alabama. It's about Tennessee Tech, Long Island U., Allegheny College, Houston Baptist, and hundreds of others.  It's about the women's field hockey team, the men's gymnastics team, the track squad, the softball team and so many others.

The coach brings in the athletes and is the only stable presence on a team that turns over players every four years.  Yes, at the top they make a lot of money. We live in a market driven society.  If you want good coaches, then the market has been set.  I have no doubt you are correct that some student athletes at the lower end of the spectrum are going to have a tough time at school vs other students, but there are plenty of regular Joe blows that are struggling right there with them.  Taking out loans, working a job or two while in school.  All walks of life.

[NavinRJohnson]

Using that argument, the Wisconsin basketball player should be paid more than the Marquette basketball player.  Since they bring in more.  Sure you want to go down that path?

Why not? Should a sales rep who brings in more revenue to his company be paid more than a counterpart or competitor who brings in less?

The NCAA has three divisions, 450,000 athletes, all but two sports lose money.  You're focusing on a handful of athletic departments that make money and defining the entire NCAA based on the few.  Most do not fit the description you are deploying.

Right, and the ones who do are by definition getting screwed by carrying the entire load for the rest.

[WarriorInNYC]

Why not? Should a sales rep who brings in more revenue to his company be paid more than a counterpart or competitor who brings in less?

Right, and the ones who do are by definition getting screwed by carrying the entire load for the rest.

So I guess players on the same team should make different amounts as well, right?  Vander Blue and Davante Gardner should make more than Jamal Ferguson based on their contributions???

So then, really, we need some sort of negotiations in order for these "salaries" to get figured out.  I guess the college athletes would need some sort of agent in order to figure all of that out....

Where would it end.  It just is not a feasible thing to do

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Why not? Should a sales rep who brings in more revenue to his company be paid more than a counterpart or competitor who brings in less?

Yes, if the company explains that in the interview, they are free to devise any sort of employment/management techniques they want.

The players aren't getting into some sort of system that bleeds them dry. For the most part, they live just as well as the normal college student. They have to work VERY HARD for it, but their living standards are pretty good.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Why not? Should a sales rep who brings in more revenue to his company be paid more than a counterpart or competitor who brings in less?

Right, and the ones who do are by definition getting screwed by carrying the entire load for the rest.

How much are you going to pay the college QB vs the punter?  How about the 2nd string linebacker vs the 3rd string defensive end?  How about the freshman point guard vs the senior wing forward?  What if the freshman point guard has a monster game middle of the season and becomes the focal player, are you going to give him a raise?  

You are comparing real world situation with a controlled system that provides an education (valued at 1000's of dollars) in exchange for participation.  The comparisons are not the same, nor should they be.  If they are, as I stated earlier, then you might as well frame your Marquette t-shirt because the only basketball you will ever see again will be played at the Helfair Center.

[NavinRJohnson]

Yes, at the top they make a lot of money. We live in a market driven society. 

Except of course where college athletes are concerned. As you yourself pointed out, if players were paid based on revenue generated, UW players would get more than MU. Why is hat a problem for you? I get that you want your MU basketball and want it to be successful, but lets call this what it is.

In your market driven society, is the QB at Nevada or Temple worth the same as Matt Barkley or Denard Robinson, as they basically are today?

Your argument seems to be that its ok since it is for the greater good. Alabama, Duke, Florida, etc. provide opportunities for other sports and small schools, and that should be additional reward enough for the small group of athletes that generate that revenue.

Athletics does provide opportunities for many, many athletes, and thats a good thing. it is extremely unfortunate however that only a few do the heavy lifting to fund it, and receive limited incremental benefit. It's great for those of us who like to watch it, and if you are one off those other athletes, but if you're the one people ware tuning into to watch, its an unfair system.