This just out...

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/college...-10000.ece

UT is setting a high bar with that figure. There are relatively few D-1 programs that will be easily able to add $5 million to their budgets. Most programs are already losing money.

In my opinion, $10,000 is an insult.
When a player can have his scholarship revoked due to a medical issue, $10,000 is not enough.
When a University can make millions by marketing the player's likeness, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player who signs a letter of intent can be run off and denied his scholarship because of a change in coaching staff, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player is pushed to pursue an ineffective degree program that will not sufficiently provide a means for him to be a productive member of society, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player has exhausted his eligibility without completing his degree and must now pay for the completion of his degree, $10,000 is not enough.

In my opinion, NCAA colleges should be required to:
1.) Ensure and guarantee that student athletes can complete their degrees at cost to the University regardless of medical infirmities, staff changes, or exhaustion of eligibility. If the player violates the conduct or academic code of the University, then the player has voided his part of the contract and the University should be released from their obligation.
2.) Ensure and guarantee health care benefits for student athletes unable to continue competing who suffered their injuries while participating in University practices and/or competitions.
3.) Reserve a percentage of all proceeds derived from the marketing of the player's image. For example, a percentage of the profits garnered from the sale and promotion of merchandise displaying Johnny Manziel's image and likeness should have been held in trust for Johnny Manziel upon graduation or upon his declaration of professional intentions.

In short, players should get degrees. Schools that consistently fail to graduate players should be penalized. Schools should not continue to build financial empires on the backs, knees, and arms of players while trumping out appalling 30-40% graduation rates. It is beyond ridiculous. Paying a player $10,000 is frankly insulting in light of the millions Universities collect while said players either graduate with useless majors or do not graduate at all.

Rant over...

To be clear, they're spending $10k more per player per year. Only half of that is a stipend

(10-22-2014 03:36 PM)texd Wrote:  

(10-22-2014 03:35 PM)RiceFight Wrote:  To be clear, they're spending $10k more per player per year. Only half of that is a stipend

No. About $5000 is a stipend. The rest is spent on expenses not normally covered by full scholarship.

Isn't that what I said...?

My bad. Misread. Ironically.

So instead of underwriting the open-ended expenses of the things mentioned by Pan95, UT will give each athlete a flat $10,000. It's quite diabolical, actually. UT and the schools that join them at that level of compensation will be paying the athletes enough to amount to an actual wage, but peanuts compared to what even arena-league players make. And it's clear from the context that players will have to accept this in lieu of compensation proportional to their worth.

This will be an NFL farm league, with UT getting NFL-prospect talent dirt-cheap. Sure, a UT scholarship amounts to that now, but UT is forestalling any actual reform by literally paying slave wages for top talent, so they can drop even the pretense of educating the players.

It will be interesting when the team sets up a picket line carrying signs that say "UT unfair".

Especially if it is about 6 hours to kickoff.

The $5000 for likeness compensation comes directly from the O'Bannon verdict.

-------

"In her injunction, Wilken writes that the NCAA is restrained from prohibiting an athlete from getting deferred compensation of $5,000 or less (currently, an athlete receives nothing). Munson said the injunction sets the figure as a $5,000 cap. However, in her 99-page opinion, the judge writes that the deferred compensation can't be less than $5,000. The ruling also states that individual schools could offer less money, she said, but only if they don't unlawfully conspire among themselves to set those amounts.

That means Football Bowl Subdivision players and Division I basketball players who are on rosters for four years potentially could get no less than $20,000 when they leave school. Wilken wrote that she set the $5,000 annual number to balance the NCAA's fears about huge payments to players. Munson says that lawyers on both sides are certain to ask for a clarification."

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/...trust-case

UT is using the O'Bannon ruling to get ahead of the situation. "The courts said $5000 is fair. Well, we're offering you twice that. Now quit grumbling and get back to work."

(10-22-2014 04:12 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  UT is using the O'Bannon ruling to get ahead of the situation. "The courts said $5000 is fair. Well, we're offering you twice that. Now quit grumbling and get back to work."

Their addressing 2 issues that are running in somewhat parallel timelines. The O'Bannon case and the cost-of-attendance issue that's been going on for a while in P5 circles. Thanks to the coming P5 autonomy, they can be separated completely to allow institutions to compensate more than they could under either one separately.

In the aftermath of the O'Bannon ruling, this strikes me as a non-story.

It seems to me that UT, while appearing to be proactive in addressing the issues, is front-running those issues to arrive at a place where they can spend less per athlete than they would by treating them like actual student-athletes, while stating that they've done everything asked of them by the athletes and the courts.

Miserably-paid athletes are less expensive than full-ride scholarship students.

It's time for the power conferences to separate from the NCAA and become a farm league tied directly to the NFL. Most of the players in the NFL couldn't give a flying fig about their college 'education.'

(10-22-2014 04:29 PM)Frizzy Owl Wrote:  It seems to me that UT, while appearing to be proactive in addressing the issues, is front-running those issues to arrive at a place where they can spend less per athlete than they would by treating them like actual student-athletes, while stating that they've done everything asked of them by the athletes and the courts.

Miserably-paid athletes are less expensive than full-ride scholarship students.

Agree completely. This appears to be a pre-emptive strike.

The above-linked article ends with this:

Quote:Chris Del Conte, Athletic Director at Texas Christian University, and (UT Athletic Director Steve) Patterson both said schools should set their own priorities. Those that invest in top-flight athletics should be rewarded, they said.

Del Conte said TCU decided it would make the investments necessary to compete nationally, and ultimately joined a major conference, the Big 12.

“We invested, even back when we didn’t know the future of that investment,” he said. “We decided, and our alumni had decided, that we were going to compete.”

It wasn’t cheap. To renovate its 45,000-seat football stadium, TCU raised $15 million each from five wealthy donors, he said, and added that they had “nickel-and-dimed our way to the rest [of the $164 million bill], with a million here and $5 million there.”

The payoff? Applications to TCU surged to 20,000 a year for its 1,600 spots.

My reaction #1: I wonder how many of those $1-5 million TCU donors will take offense at their gifts being akin to nickels and dimes.

My reaction #2: How much of an application uptick should Rice expect from having more success in high-profile sports, such as football and basketball? And how much value would would it add, since very few of the new applicants would probably be accepted? (I.e., what's the potential increase in ranking worth compared with the added cost of sports facilities/operations and reading/rejecting so many more applications?)

(10-22-2014 03:33 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  In my opinion, $10,000 is an insult.
When a player can have his scholarship revoked due to a medical issue, $10,000 is not enough.
When a University can make millions by marketing the player's likeness, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player who signs a letter of intent can be run off and denied his scholarship because of a change in coaching staff, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player is pushed to pursue an ineffective degree program that will sufficiently provide a means for him to be a productive member of society, $10,000 is not enough.
When a player has exhausted his eligibility without completing his degree and must now pay for the completion of his degree, $10,000 is not enough.

In my opinion, NCAA colleges should be required to:
1.) Ensure and guarantee that student athletes can complete their degrees at cost to the University regardless of medical infirmities, staff changes, or exhaustion of eligibility. If the player violates the conduct or academic code of the University, then the player has voided his part of the contract and the University should be released from their obligation.
2.) Ensure and guarantee health care benefits for student athletes unable to continuing competing who suffered their injuries while participating in University practices and/or competitions.
3.) Reserve a percentage of all proceeds derived from the marketing of the player's image. For example, a percentage of the profits garnered from the sale and promotion of merchandise displaying Johnny Manziel's image and likeness should have been held in trust for Johnny Manziel upon graduation or upon his declaration of professional intent.

In short, players should get degrees. Schools that consistently fail to graduate players should be penalized. Schools should not continue to build financial empires on the backs, knees, and arms of players while trumping out appalling 30-40% graduation rates. It is beyond ridiculous. Paying a player $10,000 is frankly insulting in light of the millions Universities collect while said players either graduate with useless majors or do not graduate at all.

Rant over...

Agree 100%. I have contended for a good while that much of this sillyness with "student-athletes" needs to reevaluated (and I enjoy college and pro sports as much as anyone). Funny, I was going through something and came across an Sports Illustrated cover article from 1980 about the Fraud that is college athletics and that was well before $5mm/year coaches and FB staffs of 25 (didn't Jess Neely compete and win with 4 assistants?). For the revenue sports (MFB and MBSKB, sorry for the rest, but that is reality), my proposal would be that the school provides them with 10 semesters of education, that they only have to attend one semester a year while playing (ie FB not in fall and Bskb not in Spring), then the rest as they want later in their life as well as some type of room and board. Truely with all of their obligations and attempting to have some kind of normal college life, how many can really obtain an useful education in a major other than underwater basketweaving?

A lot of the hypocrisy is truely becoming more and more evident-how many millions did TAMU make on Manziel jerseys? The sheer number of MBSKB transfers?

Frankly if this can be done in the Olympics, how different is that than US college sports, which clearly dwarf the Olympics at least in attendance and I would be surprised if not in revenue.

UT isn't paying anybody anything until they have to: http://blog.mysanantonio.com/longhorns/2...construed/

See also twitter.com/mikefinger

(10-22-2014 04:37 PM)Almadenmike Wrote:  The above-linked article ends with this:

Quote:Chris Del Conte, Athletic Director at Texas Christian University, and (UT Athletic Director Steve) Patterson both said schools should set their own priorities. Those that invest in top-flight athletics should be rewarded, they said.

Del Conte said TCU decided it would make the investments necessary to compete nationally, and ultimately joined a major conference, the Big 12.

“We invested, even back when we didn’t know the future of that investment,” he said. “We decided, and our alumni had decided, that we were going to compete.”

It wasn’t cheap. To renovate its 45,000-seat football stadium, TCU raised $15 million each from five wealthy donors, he said, and added that they had “nickel-and-dimed our way to the rest [of the $164 million bill], with a million here and $5 million there.”

The payoff? Applications to TCU surged to 20,000 a year for its 1,600 spots.

My reaction #1: I wonder how many of those $1-5 million TCU donors will take offense at their gifts being akin to nickels and dimes.

My reaction #2: How much of an application uptick should Rice expect from having more success in high-profile sports, such as football and basketball? And how much value would would it add, since very few of the new applicants would probably be accepted? (I.e., what's the potential increase in ranking worth compared with the added cost of sports facilities/operations and reading/rejecting so many more applications?)

Every college in the land is going wild on pursuing applicants, all the while making the likelihood of getting in "harder" and with the standard app, it is not like the day of paper applications using the required #2 pencil. Since it is "harder", on the surface, it makes schools look more elite than reality. College admissions is one of the biggest shell games out there as those folks do everything they can to increase applicants, fully intending to turn those vast numbers of them down. They should all be renamed applications and not admissions. HS seniors apply to 10-15 schools-how many of you did that? With all that, I am not shocked that CDC, doing what he does best-spinning, is taking full credit for the uptick in applications. Remember figures lie and.......