Get HuskerMax™ on your iPhone. Click here for details. Get tickets for all home and away games here.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 64

Thread: The worst argument against paying college football players:

  1. #21
    Recruit

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by joncarl View Post
    Fair point. However, while they are in college aren't they covered under their parents medical insurance which would cover drug expense. If their parent(s) doesn't have insurance aren't they covered under medicade? Plus these athletes get the best food, trainers, tutors that the normal student would have to pay extra for.

    This debate could go on forever and there are valid arguments for both sides, I just don't think they should get a stipend.
    This is actually over-the-counter drugs which are not covered under any health insurance plan.

  2. #22
    Scout Team
    joncarl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Fremont
    Posts
    4,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Bamsker View Post
    This is actually over-the-counter drugs which are not covered under any health insurance plan.
    Gotcha ya. Do you know if the Trainers are allowed to give things like cold med's or any over the counter meds? or is that beyond their scope?

  3. #23
    Free Agent
    Armchair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lincoln
    Posts
    2,927
    Participation in college athletics is elective. Every student who participates, does so with the knowledge that by participating, they are going to have to "give" the University their time, effort and talent. Every athlete knows they are also putting their bodies at physical risk to participate. It is their decision. The very purpose of college, is to prepare the students for future careers. While in college, all athletes are encouraged to work towards their respective degrees. Those degrees don't include majors in "Pro Sports". Keep in mind for the purposes of this discussion, that many college athletes also do not have scholarships at all.

    So let's compare an athlete on a sports scholarship, and a student on an academic scholarship. It's been established earlier in this thread, that it costs somewhere between 29k and 32k annually as the cost of attending school. Are we seriously arguing that ANY student on a full scholarship needs to be paid more? In the case of the athletic scholarship, while many of the athletes are fine students, most don't come near the academic prowess of the academic scholarship student. Yet, they have the opportunity to attend college, receive a valuable college degree, with the overwhelming majority of their financial burden paid for. Most students who wish to attend college either have to "work" their way through, have rich parents, or go into massive debt to get that same degree.

    Most University athletic departments do not operate in the black. This was also pointed out earlier in this thread. What was the figure? 14 universities, Nebraska being one of them. Yet they offer intercollegiate sports because of demand, and the belief it can enrich the lives of the students participating. I agree that in the case of Football, the financial figures are mind numbing. College coaches are paid too much, etc. But I consider those issues irrelevant, at least when discussing the issue of compensation to the athletes who participate. It is an incredible gift to be able to attend college, with the bulk of your expenses paid.
    A very fair trade, to exchange athletic talent for a college degree. Without that opportunity, their options to attend would be the same as every other college student.

    Finally. The focus really should be on that degree. According to NCAA statistics only 1.7% of college football players will be good enough to go pro. Over a 4-5 year college career, these kids are paid the equivalent of 120-150K not to play pro sports. But to become Bankers, Lawyers, Farmers, etc. A hell of a gift. We shouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth.

    http://www.beyondusports.com/college-athletes-pro/

  4. #24
    Scout Team
    Bo Pelinis Gum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,815
    Im on the fence about if they should get paid or not. For the amount of money these kids make the universities, they should be able to get maybe a small stipend in return. On the other hand, between the training table, school cafeteria etc, theres ample places to get food if thats the real concern. Half the fun in college was seeing how far you could make 20 dollars go. I can tell you whenever the gas stations had Mickey's 40's for 1$, we always had enough spare change for a great weekend. And I think I myself paid Keystones production costs for a year and I didnt get a stipend or anything from playing sports. I always had a small amount of money to cover my "fun".

  5. #25
    Guest

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Just east of KC
    Posts
    2,511
    First off, if any scholarship athlete spends a Sunday hungry, they are probably too stupid to be in college. I'm guessing that type of complaining comes from guys who are too lazy, too stubborn, or too big headed to go to the school's Union to eat. I'm sure their scholarship covers some sort of meal plan with the school.

    As far as paying athletes, you can't. Mostly out of logistics. You can't pay football players, but ignore baseball players. You also can't say that players in revenue generating sports get paid, because schools will cook their books to keep from having to pay the men's hockey team, should they just inch into the black. I've suggested in the past that players get paid, after receiving their degree, from the money generated from authentic appearal sales. Another avenue would be tapping into these monster TV deals. The B1G is due for a new TV deal in 2015 or 2016 right? What if Delaney said that a portion of what is sure to be a nearly 2-billion dollar deal goes to student-athlete stipends? I'm sure that would raise the B1G's recruting profile just a bit.

  6. #26
    Recruit

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    178
    OK, lets take a look at this using a real world example. This comes from TAMU.
    Tuition $8506.00
    Room & Board 8450.00
    Books & Supplies 2379.00
    Travel 500.00
    Personal Expenses 2349.00
    Total $21081.00

    The last figure isthe University's Cost Of Attendance. Typically, this is what the total amount of financial aid a student is entitled to, less the family's expected contribution which is dependent on income. A full ride scholarship to TAMU is for $21081.00. An atheletic scholarship is for Tuition, room and board, and books; or, $18232 as mandated by the NCAA. The amount the athlete recieves does not include the $2849.00 for travel and personal expenses. For an average school year, the differential between a "full ride" student and an athlete is a little over $200.00 per month.

    When I talk about equalizing the scholarships, I am not talking a great deal of money. The amount breaks down to about $50.00 per week. Someone earlier in the thread said the NU had 212 scholarship athletes. While the expense would be small compared to the overal budget, the amount required would be significant, in excess of $600000.00 per year for NU. Schools that are losing mony on athletics would find this amount a significant hurdle; yet, I still believe fair is fair. If a school allows the personal expenses for regular students, they shoud offer it to the athletes as well.

  7. #27
    All Legend
    utsker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,611
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Burruss View Post
    Yes, football players get all sorts of benefits (free college, tutors, training table, apparel, etc) but when you stop to consider how much money is made from their year-round efforts, I have a tough time seeing any reason why they shouldn't get a little spending money so they can afford to be college kids in their very limited free time.

    I'm not as convinced that non-revenue athletes should get the stipend, but I understand why they will.
    The same logic could be applied to Walmart employees.

  8. #28
    Red Shirt Voice Of Reason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ankeny, Ia.
    Posts
    1,144
    Tom Osborne has argued for many years that players should receive money for living expenses. That's good enough for me.

  9. #29
    Guest

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Just east of KC
    Posts
    2,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Voice Of Reason View Post
    Tom Osborne has argued for many years that players should receive money for living expenses. That's good enough for me.
    Living expenses in Lincoln are a lot different than living expenses in Miami. Living expenses for a women's golf player are probably going to be different than living expenses for a 300lb offensive lineman.

  10. #30
    Recruit

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Mobile, Alabama
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Porkchopexpress View Post
    Living expenses in Lincoln are a lot different than living expenses in Miami. Living expenses for a women's golf player are probably going to be different than living expenses for a 300lb offensive lineman.
    Living expenses are determined by the University's COA.. The COA is a mandated function of each institution's finacial aid department per federal regulations; so, expenses must be equal for all students.

  11. #31
    Starter
    Greatest Fan of All's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Multiple (Omaha, Las Vegas)
    Posts
    13,814
    Quote Originally Posted by utsker View Post
    The same logic could be applied to Walmart employees.
    Yes, it sure could.

  12. #32
    Starter
    Greatest Fan of All's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Multiple (Omaha, Las Vegas)
    Posts
    13,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Armchair View Post
    Participation in college athletics is elective. Every student who participates, does so with the knowledge that by participating, they are going to have to "give" the University their time, effort and talent. Every athlete knows they are also putting their bodies at physical risk to participate. It is their decision. The very purpose of college, is to prepare the students for future careers. While in college, all athletes are encouraged to work towards their respective degrees. Those degrees don't include majors in "Pro Sports". Keep in mind for the purposes of this discussion, that many college athletes also do not have scholarships at all.

    So let's compare an athlete on a sports scholarship, and a student on an academic scholarship. It's been established earlier in this thread, that it costs somewhere between 29k and 32k annually as the cost of attending school. Are we seriously arguing that ANY student on a full scholarship needs to be paid more? In the case of the athletic scholarship, while many of the athletes are fine students, most don't come near the academic prowess of the academic scholarship student. Yet, they have the opportunity to attend college, receive a valuable college degree, with the overwhelming majority of their financial burden paid for. Most students who wish to attend college either have to "work" their way through, have rich parents, or go into massive debt to get that same degree.

    Most University athletic departments do not operate in the black. This was also pointed out earlier in this thread. What was the figure? 14 universities, Nebraska being one of them. Yet they offer intercollegiate sports because of demand, and the belief it can enrich the lives of the students participating. I agree that in the case of Football, the financial figures are mind numbing. College coaches are paid too much, etc. But I consider those issues irrelevant, at least when discussing the issue of compensation to the athletes who participate. It is an incredible gift to be able to attend college, with the bulk of your expenses paid.
    A very fair trade, to exchange athletic talent for a college degree. Without that opportunity, their options to attend would be the same as every other college student.

    Finally. The focus really should be on that degree. According to NCAA statistics only 1.7% of college football players will be good enough to go pro. Over a 4-5 year college career, these kids are paid the equivalent of 120-150K not to play pro sports. But to become Bankers, Lawyers, Farmers, etc. A hell of a gift. We shouldn't look the gift horse in the mouth.

    http://www.beyondusports.com/college-athletes-pro/
    Your argument fails to consider that many of these athletes do not care about getting a college degree, thus its value is FAR less than your numbers, perhaps even worthless (in their eyes)...some, have no intention of ever completing their degree. Moreover, until the NFL/NCAA bargain that basically requires a few years of NCAA servitude is eliminated, these athletes (that aren't there for a degree) are basically indentured servants. Thus, "elective" is not a term that describes their participation.

  13. #33
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Marshall, TX
    Posts
    18
    Just to inject a little perspective from the front lines into the discussion, most of these numbers that reflect the cost of attendance are not figures that other scholarship students are getting, either. That reflects the total budget allocation for a student that may go beyond the scholarship but be paid out as an overage in the form of work study, grants, etc. I can't speak for how football players work, but as an academic professional who issues "full ride" scholarships, as well as a person who was on a full-ride academic scholarship at one point, I can tell you that the other categories of students on a full ride, aren't getting that full cost of attendance in scholarships either, and the quality of their food in the cafeteria is definitely sub-par to the football training table at Nebraska. Secondly, academic scholarships (and other full rides) are generally conditioned in such a way as to capture students' other scholarship money to minimize the university payout. Students who are candidates for an academic or other talent scholarship from a school are often also good candidates for outside scholarships and grants, which the school then captures and reduces the institutional contribution. For example, I had an institutional full-ride, but they captured my National Merit scholarship as well as the various other scholarships I received from outside sources so that the school's total contribution to my scholarship was reduced substantially, and I broke even at tuition, room and board.

    Secondly, this supposition that other students who get full rides have plenty of time to work is pretty fallacious. My academic full-ride, for example, was conditioned on meeting a 3.75 GPA in an honors curriculum at a competitive college, as well as participation in a campus leadership and community service program. This, combined with unpaid work-study (often a condition of a full ride), and the other extra-curriculars I was expected to do to get into a good grad school de facto precluded me from working an outside job. I know football players work a lot and I have tons of respect for them, but full ride scholarships never come out of the woodwork without strings, and there is definitely not a class of students hanging around out there enjoying the luxury of their scholarship and tons of free cash or an easy work schedule as well.

    Finally, the issue of value to the university keeps coming up, and I would suggest that other types of full ride scholarship recipients benefit the university financially as well, and may be a better investment in terms of the odds of pay-out. For example, universities reap huge benefits from their ability to participate in selective accreditation organizations and listings in ranking reports like US News. I went to a college that makes its reputation on being "highly selective" and as a result features prominently in those rankings. What that means is that their average incoming student's ACT is 27 and GPA is 3.4. Actually recruiting full classes of tuition-paying students with those numbers is impossible, but giving scholarships to a smaller cadre of recruits with perfect scores allows the college to recruit slightly lower scoring students who do pay full tuition while maintaining averages that look nice. In addition, those scholarship students are more likely to publish, go to conferences, travel abroad, bring in grants, and do all the things that raise the profile of the university. This logic doesn't just apply to academic full rides. In my current job, I work with a high profile debate team that issues full rides. Those students all represent the college at national events (requiring travel from Thursday to Monday generally 6-8 weekends a semester and two full weeks of travel for national championship tournaments in the Spring), get national press, raise the recruiting profile of the college, earn us grants, and performance on the team requires time commitment equivalent to a full-time job in addition to maintaining a minimum GPA, and a year-round season just like football.

    Sorry to make this a dissertation, but I thought a little perspective would help inform the discussion. Personally, I would love to see an athletics stipend happen, but I've been in college administration too long to think that it is feasible for many colleges. I also just wanted to get the perspective of all the other kinds of kids on full rides out there, so we don't continually participate in a false impression that there is some magic class of students (without rich parents) for whom college is a financial and practical cakewalk.

  14. #34
    Scout Team
    Bo Pelinis Gum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest Fan of All View Post
    Your argument fails to consider that many of these athletes do not care about getting a college degree, thus its value is FAR less than your numbers, perhaps even worthless (in their eyes)...some, have no intention of ever completing their degree. Moreover, until the NFL/NCAA bargain that basically requires a few years of NCAA servitude is eliminated, these athletes (that aren't there for a degree) are basically indentured servants. Thus, "elective" is not a term that describes their participation.
    Many more student athletes care about getting their degrees than what you're eluding too.

  15. #35
    A very interesting thread. I personally am against paying athletes. Along with those advantages for athletes that have already been mentioned, those on full ride scholarships will finish school with little or no debt while many other students are forced to take student loans that can reach 50-60 thousand or more that they have to pay off after graduation, often on a teacher's salary or a social workers salary. Sure the athletes may not get to go to a movie on the weekend, but they graduate without the stress of having to pay off a debt that can be overwhelming. Furthermore, the stipend would have to be the same all over the country or universities could get into a bidding war for a recruit, who might sign with whichever university could pay him more. As has been stated, not every university's athletic department is as rich as Nebraska's or Oklahoma's. If they can't afford to pay their athletes but Nebraska can, then that gives Nebraska a recruiting advantage of dicey ethics.

  16. #36
    Starter
    Greatest Fan of All's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Multiple (Omaha, Las Vegas)
    Posts
    13,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Pelinis Gum View Post
    Many more student athletes care about getting their degrees than what you're eluding too.
    I didn't allude otherwise...but, many do not care about a degree as witnessed by the sheer volume who do not graduate despite a full ride. Admittedly we have a much higher graduation rate and likely more players than the average team that do care about graduating. Our walk-on program sends that number skyrocketing.

  17. #37
    Free Agent
    Armchair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lincoln
    Posts
    2,927
    Quote Originally Posted by Greatest Fan of All View Post
    Your argument fails to consider that many of these athletes do not care about getting a college degree, thus its value is FAR less than your numbers, perhaps even worthless (in their eyes)...some, have no intention of ever completing their degree. Moreover, until the NFL/NCAA bargain that basically requires a few years of NCAA servitude is eliminated, these athletes (that aren't there for a degree) are basically indentured servants. Thus, "elective" is not a term that describes their participation.
    For your clarity, the reason I use the word "elective" is because their isn't a degree in "Pro Sports" the athletes work towards. They are offered a scholarship to attain a degree in a field of their choosing, in exchange for their service to the university as athletes. It is their choice to accept this agreement as a means to pay for school. Therefor, my use of the word elective.

    My main point is, even if the scholarship doesn't cover the entire cost of attending college, it does cover the overwhelming majority of it. It is very valuable, and an incredible advantage to be offered this opportunity because of their athletic skill. The other option to get a college degree would be the route taken by most students. Take out student loans or try to pay your way as you go.

    If they don't take advantage of the scholarship to graduate with a degree, that's on the student. Again their choice. Statistics show the overwhelming majority of them will not make a living playing professional sports after college.

  18. #38
    Red Shirt
    gutterputt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Grand Island, Ne
    Posts
    1,548


    I missed GFOA.
    I am in my own little world but it's okay they know me here.

  19. #39
    Junior Varsity
    MyBraska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    behind enemy lines in Boulder County
    Posts
    6,280
    Quote Originally Posted by Bo Pelinis Gum View Post
    Im on the fence about if they should get paid or not. For the amount of money these kids make the universities, they should be able to get maybe a small stipend in return. On the other hand, between the training table, school cafeteria etc, theres ample places to get food if thats the real concern. Half the fun in college was seeing how far you could make 20 dollars go. I can tell you whenever the gas stations had Mickey's 40's for 1$, we always had enough spare change for a great weekend. And I think I myself paid Keystones production costs for a year and I didnt get a stipend or anything from playing sports. I always had a small amount of money to cover my "fun".
    This has already been covered. The vast majority of schools lose money on athletics.
    (old Gaelic saying) Chan eil h-uile facal sireadh freagairt. Not every question requires an answer.

  20. #40
    Recruit

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    shelton ne
    Posts
    825
    They should make they players pay a fee for every fumble they lose.




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •