NCAA President Calls For "Scholarships For Life"

[Tugg Speedman]

Check off another thing the failed Northwestern union movement wanted and will now probably get.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11196036/ncaa-president-mark-emmert-calls-scholarships-life-meeting-senate-panel

NCAA President Calls For "Scholarships For Life"

WASHINGTON -- NCAA president Mark Emmert says college athletes should receive "scholarships for life."

Emmert also told a Senate panel Wednesday that scholarships should cover the full cost of attending college, not just the basics.

Emmert listed seven changes he favors in testimony before the Senate Commerce Committee. He said he hopes some will come about if Division I schools remake their decision-making structure in the coming weeks.

The hearing comes as the NCAA faces pressure from multiple fronts to reform how athletes are treated and compensated.

Emmert said he feels college sports "works extremely well for the vast majority" and the overall current model of amateurism should be preserved.

[willie warrior]

I believe that Otule had a scholarship for life, but since he is now eligible for Social Security benefits, he decided to move on.

[brandx]

Evil communist.

Trying to create another generation of takers.

[ChicosBailBonds]

First pitched more than 9 years ago, when the Northwestern players were picking their noses.  The NCAA is an organization, the MEMBERSHIP drafts the legislation and the MEMBERSHIP approves or disapproves it, just like Marquette voted NO on 4 years scholarships as a voting member.

At any rate, many of these ideas have been around for a long time and some have been voted on and rejected, others voted on and approved....long before any vote.  By the way, that was the vote that Northwestern football players voted to Unionize..right....sort of like UW not going to the NCAA tournament?   

[Tugg Speedman]

First pitched more than 9 years ago, when the Northwestern players were picking their noses.  The NCAA is an organization, the MEMBERSHIP drafts the legislation and the MEMBERSHIP approves or disapproves it, just like Marquette voted NO on 4 years scholarships as a voting member.

At any rate, many of these ideas have been around for a long time and some have been voted on and rejected, others voted on and approved....long before any vote.  By the way, that was the vote that Northwestern football players voted to Unionize..right....sort of like UW not going to the NCAA tournament?   

EVERYTHING has been proposed and debated.  I'm sure the NCAA has proposed and debated plans for what to do if Canada invades the US (and proposed it before most current players were born!) 

The issue is the proposals that matter to the union movement where going NOWHERE until the union movement forced the issue.

The vote lost but they are getting what they want because they took the vote.  So, they won!

[Dawson Rental]

"All great fortunes are amassed with either cheap or slave labor," Russell said. "The NCAA is the one group everybody is focusing on. They have this money machine. To keep it this way, the labor force has to be free or very low wages ... All the agreements with the NBA now are based on collective bargaining."

--Bill Russell when asked about NCAA players unionizing.

[Class71]

"All great fortunes are amassed with either cheap or slave labor," Russell said. "The NCAA is the one group everybody is focusing on. They have this money machine. To keep it this way, the labor force has to be free or very low wages ... All the agreements with the NBA now are based on collective bargaining."

--Bill Russell when asked about NCAA players unionizing.

The sad part is some people actually believe that rubbish.

[avid1010]

The sad part is some people actually believe that rubbish.

if you don't have enough respect for someone like bill russell, to at least stop and think about what he's saying just because of the credibility he deserves, maybe you're the sad one.  i don't necessarily agree with him, but i sure respect his opinion. 

[Class71]

if you don't have enough respect for someone like bill russell, to at least stop and think about what he's saying just because of the credibility he deserves, maybe you're the sad one.  i don't necessarily agree with him, but i sure respect his opinion. 

I never met him so I have no opinion on him one way or another. What I do know are the words were not original and have been proven wrong many times. The NCAA is not a free market and that is the problem - not capitalism which those words were used to originally condemn.

[MarquetteDano]

"All great fortunes are amassed with either cheap or slave labor," Russell said. "The NCAA is the one group everybody is focusing on. They have this money machine. To keep it this way, the labor force has to be free or very low wages ... All the agreements with the NBA now are based on collective bargaining."

--Bill Russell when asked about NCAA players unionizing.

If Bill really believes what he says he should create a pro league that feeds the nba, make millions, and pay the athletes millions. Wonder why he doesnt or cant?

[mu03eng]

If Bill really believes what he says he should create a pro league that feeds the nba, make millions, and pay the athletes millions. Wonder why he doesnt or cant?

That is his point....the current model only works if you exploit the players prior to them becoming professionals.

[mu03eng]

EVERYTHING has been proposed and debated.  I'm sure the NCAA has proposed and debated plans for what to do if Canada invades the US (and proposed it before most current players were born!) 

The issue is the proposals that matter to the union movement where going NOWHERE until the union movement forced the issue.

The vote lost but they are getting what they want because they took the vote.  So, they won!

Don't mistake correlation for causation.  The NW unionization move had almost nothing to do with this.  This is a growing media spot light coming out of a whole BUNCH of things like the Miami penalties, PSU penalties, OBannon lawsuit, NW union, lots of quotes from current and former players, etc.

The NCAA is trying to move just enough to appease enough of the masses that they move on to some other pick fork topic.

[mu03eng]

And FYI, this could be one of the ways the sports entertainment money train derails.  Any additional "benefits" that go to the revenue sports (football/basketball) will also have to go to the non-revenue sports meaning a pretty exponential growth in athletic department costs, which some schools, including MU may find hard to stomach.  And given the realities of Title IX it would be difficult to cut sports to defray costs meaning something else would have to give.  Not sure what the new model would become but it would definitely be different and one of the results could be a reduced emphasis on college football/basketball at a lot of schools because of costs.  One outcome of this could be reduced opportunities for players as well as programs fold there would be fewer "slots" available for kids to get a college education.

I'm not saying the for life model is good or bad(personally I think it's a good idea)....but there are impacts regardless of being good or bad.

[Coleman]

I believe that Otule had a scholarship for life, but since he is now eligible for Social Security benefits, he decided to move on.

Tanks for the giggles

[GGGG]

And FYI, this could be one of the ways the sports entertainment money train derails.  Any additional "benefits" that go to the revenue sports (football/basketball) will also have to go to the non-revenue sports meaning a pretty exponential growth in athletic department costs, which some schools, including MU may find hard to stomach.  And given the realities of Title IX it would be difficult to cut sports to defray costs meaning something else would have to give.  Not sure what the new model would become but it would definitely be different and one of the results could be a reduced emphasis on college football/basketball at a lot of schools because of costs.  One outcome of this could be reduced opportunities for players as well as programs fold there would be fewer "slots" available for kids to get a college education.

I'm not saying the for life model is good or bad(personally I think it's a good idea)....but there are impacts regardless of being good or bad.

I thoroughly believe that one of the motivations behind the "Power 5" conferences increasing the valuation of the athletic scholarship is to drive a bunch of schools out of FBS and Division 1 altogether.  I think Marquette can afford the enhanced scholarships.  But I am not sure if lower level, football playing schools can. 

[brandx]

If Bill really believes what he says he should create a pro league that feeds the nba, make millions, and pay the athletes millions. Wonder why he doesnt or cant?

That's really an inane point!

[Coleman]

In practice, what does this even mean?

You still only get 4 years of eligibility. So does it just mean you can go to school there for free, forever? Like a masters degree and so forth?

How many athletes will do this? Sure, some will, but probably a very small minority. Seems like more of a PR stunt than anything else.

[MarquetteDano]

That's really an inane point!

Your comment is not really a rebuttal.  The point is that if labor is being taken advantage of, you can create your own company, treat them better, hire them away, and make these millions everyone is taking about.

If you are saying there is a barrier to entry, I would ask you what is the barrier to entry?  I would argue to you that it is fans aren't really there to watch the individual talent however there to support the school.  If you argue it is to watch the talent, what is stopping someone from creating a pro league that allows hiring eighteen year olds (unlike the NBA) and taking the talent away from the NCAA schools?

[Tugg Speedman]

Don't mistake correlation for causation.  The NW unionization move had almost nothing to do with this.  This is a growing media spot light coming out of a whole BUNCH of things like the Miami penalties, PSU penalties, OBannon lawsuit, NW union, lots of quotes from current and former players, etc.

The NCAA is trying to move just enough to appease enough of the masses that they move on to some other pick fork topic.

I agree with you that the union vote is part of a greater movement.  I was rebutting Chicos idea that the NCAA came up with these ideas on their own and they had nothing to do pressure being exerted on them, from the union movement and other sources.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I was incorrect, 1996 was the first time this idea was pitched at the NCAA level....even longer than first stated.  Of course, for these things to become standard legislative policy, it has to be voted in on.  Tough going when you have so many different types of schools, small, large, poor, rich, that have different views on the subject.

Individual schools can always do what they wish, of course.

[Tugg Speedman]

I was incorrect, 1996 was the first time this idea was pitched at the NCAA level....even longer than first stated.  Of course, for these things to become standard legislative policy, it has to be voted in on.  Tough going when you have so many different types of schools, small, large, poor, rich, that have different views on the subject.

Individual schools can always do what they wish, of course.

The fact that it was first proposed 18 years ago proves my point.  They had no intention of ever doing it.  Only when the pressure of the union vote, lawsuits and public opinion came down on them did they buckle.

So it was not the NCAAs idea all on their own.  Things like the union vote are working in moving them.

[Tugg Speedman]

In practice, what does this even mean?

You still only get 4 years of eligibility. So does it just mean you can go to school there for free, forever? Like a masters degree and so forth?

How many athletes will do this? Sure, some will, but probably a very small minority. Seems like more of a PR stunt than anything else.

It means you have the rest of your life to complete your undergraduate degree, not just four years.

[Coleman]

It means you have the rest of your life to complete your undergraduate degree, not just four years.

But don't you have to be a full-time student to be eligible to play (unless you've already graduated)?

I don't see how this changes much, except that you might be able to take 12 credits a semester instead of 15 and take an extra semester to complete your degree, or if you're Dwyane Wade and want to come back and complete your degree, but honestly if you leave early for the draft its because you are making millions and a scholarship probably makes no difference to you. Wade could pay full freight and not think twice about it.

[GGGG]

But don't you have to be a full-time student to be eligible to play (unless you've already graduated)?

I don't see how this changes much, except that you might be able to take 12 credits a semester instead of 15 and take an extra semester to complete your degree, or if you're Dwyane Wade and want to come back and complete your degree, but honestly if you leave early for the draft its because you are making millions and a scholarship probably makes no difference to you. Wade could pay full freight and not think twice about it.

But Vander Blue????

[Coleman]

But Vander Blue????

Good call.

Even so, do you think he'd return if he couldn't play basketball?

[forgetful]

The scholarships for life model will just allow new ways for the Universities to exploit the system.  You'll have people taking flyers on students, with the idea of if it doesn't work out they just move them off athletic scholarship (which is limited in number) and onto regular scholarships, where they are no longer a part of the athletic program.

With the loss of the athletic program, they lose all access to the education resources (i.e. tutoring) that come along with athletics. 

They are then forced to transfer if they want to continue playing sports, or in some cases may not be able to complete their education due to lack of the education resources. 

This is a token gesture.  I agree with the scholarships for life idea, but they should have additional safeguards in place to assist the students.

[GGGG]

Good call.

Even so, do you think he'd return if he couldn't play basketball?

Soon?  Probably not.

But when he's 30, out of basketball, and realizing he needs a degree?  Possibly.

[mu03eng]

The scholarships for life model will just allow new ways for the Universities to exploit the system.  You'll have people taking flyers on students, with the idea of if it doesn't work out they just move them off athletic scholarship (which is limited in number) and onto regular scholarships, where they are no longer a part of the athletic program.

With the loss of the athletic program, they lose all access to the education resources (i.e. tutoring) that come along with athletics. 

They are then forced to transfer if they want to continue playing sports, or in some cases may not be able to complete their education due to lack of the education resources. 

This is a token gesture.  I agree with the scholarships for life idea, but they should have additional safeguards in place to assist the students.

Time out, what you have posited has nothing to do with actions by the university it is up to the student.  If they want to play, then transfer, no different than now.  If they want the education then earn it like every other student.  The educational resources athletes get are all about the amount of time they put into sports.  They don't have time to be a part time student let alone full time when they are in-season and that goes for all the sports not just the revenue sports.

They are getting a free education in this instance, I fail to see the malice or negativity in that type of opportunity.  If a student can't hack it as a regular student without the support services they've had a chance at more than they would have were they not an athlete.

[brandx]

Your comment is not really a rebuttal.  The point is that if labor is being taken advantage of, you can create your own company, treat them better, hire them away, and make these millions everyone is taking about.

If you are saying there is a barrier to entry, I would ask you what is the barrier to entry?  I would argue to you that it is fans aren't really there to watch the individual talent however there to support the school.  If you argue it is to watch the talent, what is stopping someone from creating a pro league that allows hiring eighteen year olds (unlike the NBA) and taking the talent away from the NCAA schools?

It was inane because you are suggesting a guy in his eighties should start this kind of a new endeavor.

As far as what is stopping someone from doing it, off the top of my head, I would say contracts that are already in place. To attract the top talent would require millions, which in turn requires attendance, which in turn requires large arenas.

Remember when Eddie Vedder tried to go out on his own to schedule concerts for Pearl Jam so he could sell cheaper tickets? Remember why it failed? Contracts with all large arenas were already in place.

[MarquetteDano]

It was inane because you are suggesting a guy in his eighties should start this kind of a new endeavor.

As far as what is stopping someone from doing it, off the top of my head, I would say contracts that are already in place. To attract the top talent would require millions, which in turn requires attendance, which in turn requires large arenas.

Remember when Eddie Vedder tried to go out on his own to schedule concerts for Pearl Jam so he could sell cheaper tickets? Remember why it failed? Contracts with all large arenas were already in place.

The NFL already had contracts in place but the USFL found a way to start a league.  That is not really a barrier to entry.

Strange that you say "attract top talent would require millions" as according to many like Bill Russell they are "slave labor" so you'd think paying these kids $50k a year would  easily lure them away from their awful conditions.

For those who frequent the board here who are economics majors know Marquette's award winning Professor Peter Toumanoff whose Econometric models say about this very topic.

[GGGG]

The NFL already had contracts in place but the USFL found a way to start a league.

That's probably not a very good example to use.

[MUMonster03]

In practice, what does this even mean?

You still only get 4 years of eligibility. So does it just mean you can go to school there for free, forever? Like a masters degree and so forth?

How many athletes will do this? Sure, some will, but probably a very small minority. Seems like more of a PR stunt than anything else.

How I have interpreted the scholarship for life is that if it gets pulled or you get injured and can't play anymore its not just "Sorry nice to know you." The kid can continue on and get their degree. I believe it is also there to protect those that get bad information, give up their eligibility, and enter the draft but then are busts or undrafted and can come back and complete their degree if they hadn't done so already.

You also have players who don't complete their degree get injured and then have nothing to show for it even if the injury problem began in college. This allows them to go back and complete their degree so they have some skills to get by on.

[forgetful]

Time out, what you have posited has nothing to do with actions by the university it is up to the student.  If they want to play, then transfer, no different than now.  If they want the education then earn it like every other student.  The educational resources athletes get are all about the amount of time they put into sports.  They don't have time to be a part time student let alone full time when they are in-season and that goes for all the sports not just the revenue sports.

They are getting a free education in this instance, I fail to see the malice or negativity in that type of opportunity.  If a student can't hack it as a regular student without the support services they've had a chance at more than they would have were they not an athlete.

I always find this argument BS.  I knew athletes, both DI football and DI basketball.  I spent about 40 hours a week in various different employment opportunities.  Worked out daily with the athletes and did fine without "the educational resources."  They had far more free-time than I and many of my peers that worked to pay for an education.  We all did fine as full-time students.

The difference is we were prepared adequately for college.  Many of the athletes have not been, nor would they make it to college without sports.  My complaint with the new scenario is it can lead to greater exploitation of players. 

When they are playing the are often told to worry about education last, "you'll get help don't worry about it".  They get limped along because of association with sports.  That puts them even further behind than when they started.  If you pull their support by removing them from the team (but still get a scholarship), it is really pulling the rug out from these kids.  They are being put in a situation where many of them cannot succeed, after being promised the educational support they need to catch up and succeed.

[russelllambertham]

Giving the basketball players "lifetime" scholarships to complete their Bachelor's is such a no-brainer, I can't believe anyone could argue against it. The only cost is room and board. And to avoid it from becoming some kind of an entitlement, I would make it tuition-only after 6 years. We owe these kids a complete education, along with all of the resources necessary for them to get their degrees. Marquette should lead the way, and begin offering this benefit now, without waiting for the stooges of the NCAA to make a move. It would be a great display of the Jesuit mission of Cura Personalis (Care for the Whole Person, for those who skipped Latin), it would be a great PR move and it would cost us almost nothing.

[Coleman]

Giving the basketball players "lifetime" scholarships to complete their Bachelor's is such a no-brainer, I can't believe anyone could argue against it. The only cost is room and board. And to avoid it from becoming some kind of an entitlement, I would make it tuition-only after 6 years. We owe these kids a complete education, along with all of the resources necessary for them to get their degrees. Marquette should lead the way, and begin offering this benefit now, without waiting for the stooges of the NCAA to make a move. It would be a great display of the Jesuit mission of Cura Personalis (Care for the Whole Person, for those who skipped Latin), it would be a great PR move and it would cost us almost nothing.

I don't necessarily disagree with you, but scholarships cost more than just room and board, and its certainly not "almost nothing."

They need to be paid for. Scholarships are a massive part of our athletic budget.

[brandx]

Giving the basketball players "lifetime" scholarships to complete their Bachelor's is such a no-brainer, I can't believe anyone could argue against it.

You obviously haven't been on this board before

[russelllambertham]

You're thinking like an administrator. It's another seat in a lecture hall. It's the cost of adding another chair to a classroom. The fixed cost of the class (professor) hasn't changed.

[russelllambertham]

You obviously haven't been on this board before

Thanks for that laugh!

[GGGG]

You're thinking like an administrator. It's another seat in a lecture hall. It's the cost of adding another chair to a classroom. The fixed cost of the class (professor) hasn't changed.

I agree with your larger point, but we aren't just talking about one person here.  Arguably you could be talking about dozens...which does add to the cost more than just a little bit.

But as I said, your larger point is one I agree with.

[forgetful]

You're thinking like an administrator. It's another seat in a lecture hall. It's the cost of adding another chair to a classroom. The fixed cost of the class (professor) hasn't changed.

You're neglecting the fact that there are a certain number of students they can accommodate each year.  And if dozens of those seats go to athletes, then that leads to fewer students paying tuition.

Although it doesn't cost anything per se, it does decrease revenue by an amount about 30% less than the printed tuition.