Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Delaney's position on Amateurism

[The Big Red Lebowski]

My point of view has always been, Great. Well pay you, but then you'll have to pay your tuition, pay for your rooming, and pay for your meals.

Let's see how they'd like that.

Assuming they received something close to the NFL's collective bargaining agreement, they'd love it. If each school in the top 25 revenue-producing schools paid out 47% of revenue to the players (like the NFL) then each of its 85 scholarship players would get hundreds of thousands each year. Tuition, room and meal plan at public schools is $16k to $18k for residents (double for non-residents).

http://college-football.si.com/2013...rth-578000-dollars-per-year-business-insider/

 

[bilsker]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...to-be-paid-let-em-turn-pro-out-of-high-school

I agree with this 1000%

If you want to get paid - go pro. If you want compensation for your likeness and/or autograph - go pro. Don't sue the NCAA because they make money off of your jersey sales. Money that funds Title IX (and other initiatives). Sue the NFL for preventing you from going pro.

If you want a free education, if you want an opportunity to play in some of the grandest stages of the world, if you want an opportunity to spend your early adult years in an environment suited for your maturity ... go to college.

I can't stand this Delaney guy. He's a crybaby ("Maybe we'll just go DIII!"). These buttclowns talk about the "Student athlete" and all that nonsense. They don't give a fat rat's *** about the "student athlete". All they care about is finding more ways to squeeze a dollar out of their golden goose. And he get's high and mighty like this. Hey, Richard Head...if YOU don't like it maybe you SHOULD go be the commish of a DIII conference.

 

[Red Crawdad]

If you need more money take out a loan from the bank. With the free college education you are getting you can pay the money back with the good job you will get.

I have mentioned before and still maintain the NCAA could maintain some sort of bank type system, where athletes, if need be could borrow money at a lower interest rate for living expenses etc. There are some athletes that have family money and don't need a stipend. It could be set up like some type of student loan, and monitored by the NCAA so the school is off the hook. This would be open to male/female and any sport. I know some sports don't give full rides (like wrestling,swimming etc.), so these athletes might need to borrow a little more, but don't have time to work. Make the interest as low as possible.

Excellent thoughts.

To me, the thought of paying these kids is ridiculous. As mentioned in the OP article, these kids get ~$250,000 in tuition at Purdue. That's a pretty good paycheck for a person with only a high school education (and as we see a number of players who struggle to qualify, it's often not a great HS education).

What about these big universities making money off of these poor kids? Welcome to the real world. In my job, I could design a $10 billion dollar a year drug. That doesn't mean that I'm getting a cut of that profit, it means I did the job I signed up to do. So...suck it up kids, get your education and be grateful.

 

[bilsker]

Excellent thoughts.

To me, the thought of paying these kids is ridiculous. As mentioned in the OP article, these kids get ~$250,000 in tuition at Purdue. That's a pretty good paycheck for a person with only a high school education (and as we see a number of players who struggle to qualify, it's often not a great HS education).

What about these big universities making money off of these poor kids? Welcome to the real world. In my job, I could design a $10 billion dollar a year drug. That doesn't mean that I'm getting a cut of that profit, it means I did the job I signed up to do. So...suck it up kids, get your education and be grateful.

But you might get a bonus. A raise. A promotion. Certainly you'd be on the radar of other pharmaceutical companies. I'm guessing they couldn't put your face on the packaging without compensating you.

 

[Red Crawdad]

But you might get a bonus. A raise. A promotion. Certainly you'd be on the radar of other pharmaceutical companies. I'm guessing they couldn't put your face on the packaging without compensating you.

Oh, yes they can. We recently had a small group of scientists who were laid off. Shortly after, a billboard went up showcasing the "Faces of (the company)." One of the people on the billboard was one of those laid off. Oops!

As for the promotion or being on the radar for other companies comparison, that's the NFL for college FB players. Do your job well enough, and you may be on the radar for a "promotion" to the NFL.

 

[bilsker]

Oh, yes they can. We recently had a small group of scientists who were laid off. Shortly after, a billboard went up showcasing the "Faces of (the company)." One of the people on the billboard was one of those laid off. Oops!

As for the promotion or being on the radar for other companies comparison, that's the NFL for college FB players. Do your job well enough, and you may be on the radar for a "promotion" to the NFL.

First of all I'm guessing if your face were prominently used in the advertising for a particular product (as opposed to some "faces of ____" billboard) that you'd be due some compensation or would have a case for it.

Secondly, if a local car wash approached you and offered you $500 to "endorse" their business in on a local mail campaign...I'm guessing you could do so.

 

[AKveteran]

basically everyone that is arguing for paying college athletes is wanting SMU to come back, only at all the schools with well heeled boosters.

Trying to argue that they should be able to "market" themselves" and make money from their "likeness" is like opening the door for Alabama boosters to go to that high school kid and say, "I like the way you play--you are going to be a star--I'll give you 50k for your autograph once you are in a tide uni"

Its stupid. These players are getting paid. Tuition, books, room, board, etc.

 

[werewasi]

When I was in college, early 70's, the football players got a small laundry allowance. I see no problem with paying a small stipend to players. After all, it is against NCAA rules for them to hold a job during the school year.

 

[Huskermedic]

The problem with letting kids go from HS to the NFL is these kids bodies are no were near ready to take the abuse in the NFL. Some are not even ready for College. Why don't we pay them but they can't collect until they graduate or sign a contract with the NFL.

 

[redarmy]

In the 70's it was an honor to play for a university on Scholorship. Now its an entitlement and at that, its not enough. Today, kids playing basketball on scholorship is nothing more than a springboard for the NBA draft. See Kentucky. I would like to see the NFL lift all age requirments and allow high school kids to by pass on their obligation to attend college. Let them earn their "likeness" potential at the hands of the NFL system. When they get cut from the NFL and have no education, they can live off their "likeness" potential.

 

[bilsker]

In the 70's it was an honor to play for a university on Scholorship. Now its an entitlement and at that, its not enough. Today, kids playing basketball on scholorship is nothing more than a springboard for the NBA draft. See Kentucky. I would like to see the NFL lift all age requirments and allow high school kids to by pass on their obligation to attend college. Let them earn their "likeness" potential at the hands of the NFL system. When they get cut from the NFL and have no education, they can live off their "likeness" potential.

In the 70s you didn't have coaches making $5M. You didn't have EA (and the NCAA) sports using your likeness to make billions. You didn't have the Big 10 Network and the billions involved there. You probably didn't have a crazy "team gear" market like you do now. You didn't have the NCAA giving guys crap over a ham sandwich...much less a "shady" part time job. Sure it was still big business...but NOTHING like it is now. These monster corporations (schools, NCAA, Networks, conferences, video games, etc) make an incredible amount of money and the ONLY reason they do is because of the efforts of the players. Without the players ALL of that money goes away. Every penny.

 

[The Impaler]

In the 70s you didn't have coaches making $5M. You didn't have EA (and the NCAA) sports using your likeness to make billions. You didn't have the Big 10 Network and the billions involved there. You probably didn't have a crazy "team gear" market like you do now. You didn't have the NCAA giving guys crap over a ham sandwich...much less a "shady" part time job. Sure it was still big business...but NOTHING like it is now. These monster corporations (schools, NCAA, Networks, conferences, video games, etc) make an incredible amount of money and the ONLY reason they do is because of the efforts of the players. Without the players ALL of that money goes away. Every penny.

What's your solution bilsker?

I am on the fence with this. There are a lot of questions I have if there were a pay for play model or on the flip side the age restriction is lifted on the pro levels.

Regarding pay for play, I understand that the kids make a lot of money for the schools, etc. My two biggest concerns would be:

1. How do you regulate it? Not to suggest that the NCAA is even remotely effective at curtailing cheating now.
2. What does it do to all the other intercollegiate sports? Will there be enough money after players are paid to fund the other sports?

Regarding pro sports lifting the age restrictions my only fear would be does CFB turn into CBB? I'd hate to see college football not get the best players or only get players for a year until they get on the radar. Immediately, my first thought is, pro teams probably aren't going to be interested in taking guys right out of HS. I think it's harder to project football players 4-5 years down the line than say basketball. Some exceptions may be a guy like Andrew Luck, but it hurts CFB to not have him at all.

I guess I would like to see more of an Olympic model. Kids don't get paid for playing, but they can make money off their likeness and autographs. I realize there is risk in regulating this but is it really harder than trying to keep under the table payments away from the kids now?

 

[redarmy]

In the 70s you didn't have coaches making $5M. You didn't have EA (and the NCAA) sports using your likeness to make billions. You didn't have the Big 10 Network and the billions involved there. You probably didn't have a crazy "team gear" market like you do now. You didn't have the NCAA giving guys crap over a ham sandwich...much less a "shady" part time job. Sure it was still big business...but NOTHING like it is now. These monster corporations (schools, NCAA, Networks, conferences, video games, etc) make an incredible amount of money and the ONLY reason they do is because of the efforts of the players. Without the players ALL of that money goes away. Every penny.

it doesnt matter. It doesnt change the fact that they are getting a free education and playing for the university takes there zero likeness and makes it relevent. If they want to be compensated for their "likeness" that doesnt exist outside of their tie to the university, then they should be able to go pro out of high school and go make their money off of their "likeness".

 

[Hotlanta Husker]

it doesnt matter. It doesnt change the fact that they are getting a free education and playing for the university takes there zero likeness and makes it relevent. If they want to be compensated for their "likeness" that doesnt exist outside of their tie to the university, then they should be able to go pro out of high school and go make their money off of their "likeness".

THIS

 

[The Big Red Lebowski]

it doesnt matter. It doesnt change the fact that they are getting a free education and playing for the university takes there zero likeness and makes it relevent. If they want to be compensated for their "likeness" that doesnt exist outside of their tie to the university, then they should be able to go pro out of high school and go make their money off of their "likeness".

If it didn't matter, there wouldn't be a lawsuit. Like all of you, I don't want college football to become NFL light, but I think all this anger toward the players is misplaced. A vast majority of the blame belongs to the NCAA.

The NCAA could have done all sorts of things to get in front of this issue and refused. Had they allowed small stipends and true cost scholarships, this wouldn't have happened. If their greed and hypocrisy wouldn't have led them to sell player jerseys and championship DVD's in their online store, this wouldn't have happened. If they wouldn't have licensed their logo to EA Sports, this wouldn't have happened. The March Madness TV deal is $11 BILLION dollars. That wasn't enough?