Should we pay NCAA players?

[Gary]

Reading the Urban to OSU thread, and I think this is a great topic on it's own. Personally I would pay at least a little bit to the athletes, not just the basketball or football, but the baseball, lacrosse or even the 3rd string swimmer on the swimming team. I know a lot of the athletes between practice, classes and games do not have the time for a job. I think at least a couple hundred more a month-$500 more a month should at least help them with food and other expenses. Maybe at least help them in the long run. Not saying pay them thousands of dollars but something to help them out in the least.

[Gothamite]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

[charger77]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

100% agreed!

Also, if schools were to pay their athletes then prepare for the cost of school to skyrocket as they look to defer the costs.

I used to date a field hockey player during my days at Central Michigan. In addition to her free schooling and free room and board she had many other perks come her way that made it very worth while to her, and that was just a field hockey player at a mid major.

[Saintsfan]

This is a tough one, because whilst the NCAA is handing out stiff penalties for financial irregularities, the obvious answer is yes. And it might help keep a few basketball players in college for a bit longer. But I'm not a fan of Universities essentially becoming pro sports franchises with a sideline in education. So when someone puts forward a proposal that balances all of that, I'll say yes, but for now I am reluctantly against it.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

This is a tough one, because whilst the NCAA is handing out stiff penalties for financial irregularities, the obvious answer is yes. And it might help keep a few basketball players in college for a bit longer. But I'm not a fan of Universities essentially becoming pro sports franchises with a sideline in education. So when someone puts forward a proposal that balances all of that, I'll say yes, but for now I am reluctantly against it.

Sorry to tell you, but we've passed that point. And I wouldn't even say universities are development systems -- they're actually professional sports franchises in their own rights. The only problem is that everyone's making tons of money except for the labor.

[crashcarson15]

This is a tough one, because whilst the NCAA is handing out stiff penalties for financial irregularities, the obvious answer is yes. And it might help keep a few basketball players in college for a bit longer. But I'm not a fan of Universities essentially becoming pro sports franchises with a sideline in education. So when someone puts forward a proposal that balances all of that, I'll say yes, but for now I am reluctantly against it.

Sorry to tell you, but we've passed that point. And I wouldn't even say universities are development systems -- they're actually professional sports franchises in their own rights. The only problem is that everyone's making tons of money except for the labor.

So should we pay high school players that generate revenue for their high schools? Middle school players?

[McCall]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

100% agreed!

Also, if schools were to pay their athletes then prepare for the cost of school to skyrocket as they look to defer the costs.

I used to date a field hockey player during my days at Central Michigan. In addition to her free schooling and free room and board she had many other perks come her way that made it very worth while to her, and that was just a field hockey player at a mid major.

Count me in as well.

The average cost of college is close to $80k for four years. That's $80k that these student-athletes aren't having to pay that other students are. Not everyone in school is on scholarships. And I know some think we're crying about that, but ask those students who are working 2-3 jobs just to pay for school, in addition to full-time classes, if they think it'd be fair.

I'm fine with a little money for living, STUDENT living. Allowing them to sell their own personal possessions, even memorabilia as long as it's there's and not the property of the school, is also fine.

They are in fact still students.

This is a tough one, because whilst the NCAA is handing out stiff penalties for financial irregularities, the obvious answer is yes. And it might help keep a few basketball players in college for a bit longer. But I'm not a fan of Universities essentially becoming pro sports franchises with a sideline in education. So when someone puts forward a proposal that balances all of that, I'll say yes, but for now I am reluctantly against it.

Sorry to tell you, but we've passed that point. And I wouldn't even say universities are development systems -- they're actually professional sports franchises in their own rights. The only problem is that everyone's making tons of money except for the labor.

So should we pay high school players that generate revenue for their high schools? Middle school players?

Exactly. This isn't professional sports, it's extracurricular activities. Coaches get paid because that's their JOB. Once these kids graduate or leave school, THEN they can try for a profession in sports.

[McCall]

And the exposure they get from tv and such, is exposure to potential employers (pro teams) that any student in any other field would kill to have. Students are always having to do a lot more extra to get their names out there or their work seen by potential employers and all these guys have to do is play their sport and we talk all year about how high they're gonna be drafted.

You guys are calling the universities greedy, but with a free $80,000 education, access to the best possible equipment and facilities and staff to help you achieve your potential, as well as free exposure to help make finding a job easier, you guys are acting like all of that just isn't good enough. Greed can go both ways. Don't act like your opinions are of the purist nature.

[dfwabel]

And the exposure they get from tv and such, is exposure to potential employers (pro teams) that any student in any other field would kill to have. Students are always having to do a lot more extra to get their names out there or their work seen by potential employers and all these guys have to do is play their sport and we talk all year about how high they're gonna be drafted.

You guys are calling the universities greedy, but with a free $80,000 education, access to the best possible equipment and facilities and staff to help you achieve your potential, as well as free exposure to help make finding a job easier, you guys are acting like all of that just isn't good enough. Greed can go both ways. Don't act like your opinions are of the purist nature.

An incoming Freshman is not guaranteed four years of a scholarship, rather just one year. They can essentially be "cut" or have their scholarship taken away for any reason the university wants to place on it, but we all know that it is most likely to be related to on-field performance (or lack there of).

[McCall]

The NCAA is now allowing 4-year scholarships.

[aci]

I don't even agree with an athlete getting a scholarship unless they have the academic talent to merit it. Colleges are about getting an education, not about being a platform for young men (and occasionally women) to become professional athletes at no cost to themselves. If you're not at college for the education, you shouldn't be at the college to begin with.

The idea that we even have to ask these kinds of questions is bogus... pay students? If you pay the athletes, you had better pay the rest of the students, too.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

I think the big difference in opinion is between what is and what ought to be. What ought to be is a simple, college pride-driven intercollegiate activity, like college rugby clubs. What is, though, is a mostly professional multi-billion dollar industry that produces millions for schools, athletic management, and TV networks. I'm going to sound like a broken record, but NCAA football is a professional sport paying professional staff professional wages. To argue otherwise is, again, to ignore what is for what perhaps should be.

And if we accept that NCAA football is a professional sport, then its orders deserve professional compensation. And, no, an education dependent on their ability to produce on the field, attend daily practices and criss-cross the country doesn't count. At least not in my eyes. A scholarship for a chemist is completely different than a scholarship for a quarterback, and we don't force the chemists to attend 5 am practices, daily film sessions, and Under Armor photoshoots on top of their school work.

I say we give football players a degree in football, add a fair-wage stipend, and stop pretending that it's 1950.

[dfwabel]

The NCAA is now allowing 4-year scholarships.

But minimum standards will still be for only one year. A coach will continue to us that for their personal benefit, not for the well-being of the student athlete. Oversigning will continue in conferences which allow that for the same reason...it benefits the coach and the program.

[charger77]

These players also have the option of passing on the sports and free schooling and paying for college like everybody else does.

[McCall]

I think the big difference in opinion is between what is and what ought to be. What ought to be is a simple, college pride-driven intercollegiate activity, like college rugby clubs. What is, though, is a mostly professional multi-billion dollar industry that produces millions for schools, athletic management, and TV networks. I'm going to sound like a broken record, but NCAA football is a professional sport paying professional staff professional wages. To argue otherwise is, again, to ignore what is for what perhaps should be.

And if we accept that NCAA football is a professional sport, then its orders deserve professional compensation. And, no, an education dependent on their ability to produce on the field, attend daily practices and criss-cross the country doesn't count. At least not in my eyes. A scholarship for a chemist is completely different than a scholarship for a quarterback, and we don't force the chemists to attend 5 am practices, daily film sessions, and Under Armor photoshoots on top of their school work.

I say we give football players a degree in football, add a fair-wage stipend, and stop pretending that it's 1950.

YOU believe it's a professional sport. YOU do. Stop acting like your opinion is fact and we should all accept it or we're wrong. You seem to have forgotten how college works. Coaches are professionals who get paid to come in and coach and train these guys to prepare them for their profession AFTER college. Seems like you're the one who is ignoring the situation.

[ESTONES6]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

Just asking, but, say for the next 4 years, you could only go to work and study/learn new methods for your job. You are not compensated, but you get to share a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom, small kitchen, no living room or dining room, house with 1 other person, but again, you don't have to pay rent, loan, mortgage, etc. Because of your long hours and time needed for preparation, you don't have time to find a job that can pay you some extra scratch. You don't receive any compensation from your job, so you can't buy your own groceries, you can't rent a movie, you can't buy any new video games, you can't go to the bar for some pops, you can't go to the mall and buy some new threads, you can't buy a song from the iTunes store etc. because you flat out have a total net income of $0.00. For about 2-3 months every year, you are granted a vacation from work completely. Can you find a job for the next 8-12 weeks that will pay you enough to live a modest lifestyle for the next 8-9 months?

[charger77]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

Just asking, but, say for the next 4 years, you could only go to work and study/learn new methods for your job. You are not compensated, but you get to share a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom, small kitchen, no living room or dining room, house with 1 other person, but again, you don't have to pay rent, loan, mortgage, etc. Because of your long hours and time needed for preparation, you don't have time to find a job that can pay you some extra scratch. You don't receive any compensation from your job, so you can't buy your own groceries, you can't rent a movie, you can't buy any new video games, you can't go to the bar for some pops, you can't go to the mall and buy some new threads, you can't buy a song from the iTunes store etc. because you flat out have a total net income of $0.00. For about 2-3 months every year, you are granted a vacation from work completely. Can you find a job for the next 8-12 weeks that will pay you enough to live a modest lifestyle for the next 8-9 months?

At 18 I would have taken that in exchange for free school and free room and board in place of paying of the nearly $60,000 that I have in student loans.

[McCall]

They're already being well-compensated.

They are given free access to what would otherwise be a very expensive education. If they start paying for that, then we can talk about paying players.

Just asking, but, say for the next 4 years, you could only go to work and study/learn new methods for your job. You are not compensated, but you get to share a 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom, small kitchen, no living room or dining room, house with 1 other person, but again, you don't have to pay rent, loan, mortgage, etc. Because of your long hours and time needed for preparation, you don't have time to find a job that can pay you some extra scratch. You don't receive any compensation from your job, so you can't buy your own groceries, you can't rent a movie, you can't buy any new video games, you can't go to the bar for some pops, you can't go to the mall and buy some new threads, you can't buy a song from the iTunes store etc. because you flat out have a total net income of $0.00. For about 2-3 months every year, you are granted a vacation from work completely. Can you find a job for the next 8-12 weeks that will pay you enough to live a modest lifestyle for the next 8-9 months?

It's not the same thing. Despite what some of these so-called "elite" members are saying, it is not a job.

Now take that scenario and add nearly 6-figures in tuition and you have every other student. Yes they can work, but it nowhere comes close to comparing to what athletes get in return. They aren't gonna spend the next 15 years or so still paying off student loans.

[RyanMcD29]

I don't know.. I think you'd open a whole can of worms when it comes to the thousands upon thousands of non-revenue and D-2 and D-3 athletes, many of whom aren't getting full-ride scholarships (or none at all at the D-3 level). I mean, in my family alone I've got a cousin in D-1 baseball and another in D-3 softball, both of whom have to go through all the classes like a normal student and aren't getting exactly a free education by any means. That's not even taking into account all the non-revenue (mainly lacrosse and softball and some D-2/3 Football) athletes I know here at home, and they ain't getting that much of a break either, as well as the large number of rowers and runners I know at SU. I mean, it's different for football and basketball players, but there's a very big balancing act when you look at student-athletes as a whole. And the problem is the majority of them aren't playing football and basketball and are attending class like a normal student and aren't getting those $50K/year scholarships, so there could be a whole mess when it comes to organizing pay-for-play situations.

[DG_ThenNowForever]

YOU believe it's a professional sport. YOU do. Stop acting like your opinion is fact and we should all accept it or we're wrong. You seem to have forgotten how college works. Coaches are professionals who get paid to come in and coach and train these guys to prepare them for their profession AFTER college. Seems like you're the one who is ignoring the situation.

Right. I have an opinion and so do you. "I think" should be inferred in all of my declarative statements.

People disagree on stuff; it doesn't mean anyone thinks you specifically are a bad guy. Just that I think you're wrong. It happens.

To respond on -Dan's post, big-time college athletes aren't like us, in part because they can't be. Again, let's stop pretending the QB at an SEC is just a regular guy and instead make him part of the athletic department with a salary and access to education if he wants it. Straddling the student-athlete line works great for schools, but not so great for players. Maybe in a perfect world, but not in our real one.