Athlete taking cash?

[WhyNotaSooner]

Wait... you mean that Universities can set and establish tier levels of payments for TV rights but they can't manage to establishment tier levels for players. Huh. Imagine that. A campus full of scholars, professors and admins and they can't figure it out.

 

[BillyRay]

Wait... you mean that Universities can set and establish tier levels of payments for TV rights but they can't manage to establishment tier levels for players. Huh. Imagine that. A campus full of scholars, professors and admins and they can't figure it out.

I always thought Title IX was the big barrier to this idea?

 

[JConXtsy]

Wait... you mean that Universities can set and establish tier levels of payments for TV rights but they can't manage to establishment tier levels for players. Huh. Imagine that. A campus full of scholars, professors and admins and they can't figure it out.

Not my point. The point is the complexity to the athlete. You'll have athletes spending more time and resources trying to figure out their financial situations and options than they will thinking about classes.

Well, maybe then they'll understand how their classwork pertains to real life.

 

[Medic007]

For a med student, their primary reason for being at that university is to not only get an education, but to also develop experience they are going to use towards their chosen career path.

Exactly the same as a football player hoping to play pro football. They are not only getting an education (working for their scholarship by playing football), but they are also getting valuable experience, training, coaching, nutrition, etc in order to best prepare them for professional football. You're aware of how much camps for HS ball cost. Imagine what the college football player would have to pay for what they receive as part of their "compensation."

Student athletes, especially football players, are on scholarship to play football. Their class and education paths are chosen to make sure they stay eligible to play football.

Their scholarship is actually for educational purposes. Their are some who retain their scholarships even if they aren't playing any longer.

But for the vast majority of these kids, their education comes secondary to their primary purpose of being there. And that primary purpose is staying eligible to play football.

And that's a terrible mindset. There are some that approach it that way, but there are far more that take their education seriously in preparation for life after football. Playing football is a way to pay for education, and then some. Their primary goal is to complete their education. They can't play football if they aren't meeting the academic requirements.

 

[BillyRay]

Exactly the same as a football player hoping to play pro football. They are not only getting an education (working for their scholarship by playing football), but they are also getting valuable experience, training, coaching, nutrition, etc in order to best prepare them for professional football. You're aware of how much camps for HS ball cost. Imagine what the college football player would have to pay for what they receive as part of their "compensation."

And these kids are paying back that universities investment and then some. Why else would athletic programs be dumping tens of millions of dollars into lavish facilities. The foundation of bringing in that money is performance on the football field. So the university and the athletic departments are getting a massive return on giving these athletes all the things you list.

But letting kids seek their own free market value in endorsements affects the universities how? It's not coming out of their budgets. It's not some financial drain on the university if a kid like Baker Mayfield signs a local deal with a place to do some promotions. Or whether he books some autograph signing deals during the summer.

I mean heck...just a few years ago the OU football team came under investigation for eating too much pasta at an event. I mean are you friking kidding me???

Their primary goal is to complete their education. They can't play football if they aren't meeting the academic requirements.

We will disagree on this one then. No doubt they can't play football if they aren't meeting academic requirements, which is exactly why many take classes geared more towards staying eligible rather than building a true education. I heard a college teacher say it best once, "these kids may be getting a degree, but they are not getting an education". It's because staying eligible to play football is more important than the quality of classes they are taking.

 

[Medic007]

And these kids are paying back that universities investment and then some. Why else would athletic programs be dumping tens of millions of dollars into lavish facilities. The foundation of bringing in that money is performance on the football field. So the university and the athletic departments are getting a massive return on giving these athletes all the things you list.

But letting kids seek their own free market value in endorsements affects the universities how? It's not coming out of their budgets. It's not some financial drain on the university if a kid like Baker Mayfield signs a local deal with a place to do some promotions. Or whether he books some autograph signing deals during the summer.

I mean heck...just a few years ago the OU football team came under investigation for eating too much pasta at an event. I mean are you friking kidding me???


We will disagree on this one then. No doubt they can't play football if they aren't meeting academic requirements, which is exactly why many take classes geared more towards staying eligible rather than building a true education. I heard a college teacher say it best once, "these kids may be getting a degree, but they are not getting an education". It's because staying eligible to play football is more important than the quality of classes they are taking.

I'm not against endorsement deals except that defeats the purpose of any parity. Schools like Alabama and Texas can stuff their rosters with 5 stars by simply lining up the deals, big deals, for them in exchange for a commitment. A lot of teams can't compete with that. Turning college football into a free for all will be the death of what makes college football great in my opinion.

I think you may be surprised to know that a lot of collegiate football players get meaningful degrees. But you know I'm always good for agree to disagree. That's what makes for good chatter.

 

[BillyRay]

I'm not against endorsement deals except that defeats the purpose of any parity. Schools like Alabama and Texas can stuff their rosters with 5 stars by simply lining up the deals, big deals, for them in exchange for a commitment. A lot of teams can't compete with that. Turning college football into a free for all will be the death of what makes college football great in my opinion.

I think you may be surprised to know that a lot of collegiate football players get meaningful degrees. But you know I'm always good for agree to disagree. That's what makes for good chatter.

For me, until the NCAA is able to get a true playoff system that gives ALL 128 Div-I football teams a shot, then I really think the idea of parity is a lost cause. Right now there is more parity in college football then say 30 years ago, but it's really done nothing but add more confusion and debate to the game. Why try to create parity between 128 programs, when you have a "selection" committee picking 4 teams for a playoff. It just allows more and more teams outside of the chosen 4 to complain and gripe about being left out.

In the NFL, MLB, and the NBA I can understand parity. The structure is designed for it. And with fewer teams it's much more feasible.

And really, the powerhouse programs still have a clear advantage these days regardless due to their larger athletic budgets that fuel money into superior facilities and such. The smaller programs will never be able to compete with that. So parity in college football is overall an illusion.

But I see exactly what you are saying Medic. And I do agree with you in a way. I'm not a big fan of creating an environment of programs loading up rosters with elite talent because they have the inside track to endorsement deals. But at the same time I don't like the idea of the college football industry generating billions a year and the players just need to be happy with an education and a roof over their heads.

 

[Medic007]

For me, until the NCAA is able to get a true playoff system that gives ALL 128 Div-I football teams a shot, then I really think the idea of parity is a lost cause. Right now there is more parity in college football then say 30 years ago, but it's really done nothing but add more confusion and debate to the game. Why try to create parity between 128 programs, when you have a "selection" committee picking 4 teams for a playoff. It just allows more and more teams outside of the chosen 4 to complain and gripe about being left out.

In the NFL, MLB, and the NBA I can understand parity. The structure is designed for it. And with fewer teams it's much more feasible.

And really, the powerhouse programs still have a clear advantage these days regardless due to their larger athletic budgets that fuel money into superior facilities and such. The smaller programs will never be able to compete with that. So parity in college football is overall an illusion.

But I see exactly what you are saying Medic. And I do agree with you in a way. I'm not a big fan of creating an environment of programs loading up rosters with elite talent because they have the inside track to endorsement deals. But at the same time I don't like the idea of the college football industry generating billions a year and the players just need to be happy with an education and a roof over their heads.

I understand the obscene money generated by college football. On the college side, most of that money goes into covering the costs associated with the football program and the other sports. That's where many athletic departments go into the red though.

Guys like Joe Castiglione and Danny Davis aren't rolling in dollars. OU spends a lot of money on fan experience and safety in addition to the crazy costs of the athletic side. If you really dig into the numbers, the OUAD relies on big donor dollars to fund the arms race on facilities because the football program doesn't make anywhere close to the amount of money it takes to keep up.

I get what you're saying about compensation. I'm just looking at it from the ability of a college to pay for it. Most colleges couldn't afford it. And endorsement deals will literally open the flood gates of dollars the NCAA tries to keep out to better level an already unlevel playing field. Some might think I'm a socialist or communist, but as the college football world moves closer to mega conferences and TV deals, a league wide revenue sharing program might be needed for colleges, even those in our own conference, to continue to fund football teams.

Don't get me started on the playoff/bowl racket. I know how to find you on Facebook so the conversation will never turn off, much like the TV on Poltergeist.