(05-04-2016 09:11 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  They are already starting to pay athletes Cost of attendance above what they are already getting for their scholarship. Tennessee was able to offer $5,666 now.
That was the largest in the NCAA when it first started, not sure if it still is.

The "Cost of Attendance" is not pay for play and the NCAA/schools have gone out of their way to make sure that it is not called or legally considered as such. COA was placated to make up the difference between what a college scholarship covers, and the actual cost of attending the college/university to include housing, books, etc. Which is the why the COA is different for every school.

COA is NOT stipend for play or services rendered, it is not based off a percentage of revenue.

(05-04-2016 12:02 PM)BucNut22 Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 11:44 AM)shampoo Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:11 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  They are already starting to pay athletes Cost of attendance above what they are already getting for their scholarship. Tennessee was able to offer $5,666 now.
That was the largest in the NCAA when it first started, not sure if it still is.

Right. Anything beyond that, make them work like normal students that have to. Normal students don't benefit from the marketing exposure their athletic program & the NCAA offers, so again, I'm not largely concerned by a few student athletes missing out on commercial moneys. As soon as we start allowing athletes to be paid for commercials & video games, it will only accelerate the financial culture that power programs have ostracized smaller conferences out of. "Come to Florida! Our football stars make 20% more on average from endorsements than Tennessee football stars."

It's funny which students you have an issue paying and which you do not. Normal college students all over American get paid a stipend in ADDITION to their school supported scholarship. Every graduate and teaching assistant walking around colleges is paid a stipend in addition to a scholarship and no one bats an eye. Normal students, with the exception of maybe a research assistant, aren't responsible for generating a dime for the college or university. Normal students don't have limits on how much or where they can work. Normal students aren't required to NOT use their abilities to generate income.

Any student put through a Federal work program is supposed to work for their scholarship in a way that supports operations or administration. You could place a dollar value on their time, and that presents in the form of hours required. It's up to the college that uses the student labor to use it effectively. The purpose is to employ low cost labor and help students in doing so.

Let's consider the time commitments & guaranteed compensation for student athletes (guaranteed regardless of performance or the team winning, what really matters):

Student athletes are well supported with weight training and conditioning programs, medical attention, coaching, etc. and they are accommodated on travel. Most student athletes would have no access to this outside of a college program. They earn it by practicing, and in order to qualify for participation they maintain academic progress--the scholarship support some receive is awarded on a merit basis tied directly to athletic ability. Those that receive scholarship do so with no obligation to fill stats sheets or guarantee wins. For an out of state athlete, that could represent an opportunity cost over $100,000 to the university.

Winning is what you want to pay for. The school administration, the athletic dept, and years of organizational culture develop a winning brand that attracts players. The players gain as much in prestige as they give by attending major programs. They, collectively, as teams, win or lose games. The program, coaching, training, and medical are guaranteed to the players regardless of winning. (Well, they could always be cut from the team arbitrarily...it does happen, seemingly.)

Those few players that do individually make a statistically significant difference to winning would likely make it pro out of high school. Let them go straight to pro. Just because the commercial market is willing to pay someone for their time on film or their image in video games doesn't mean we are morally obligated to see that pay through to student athletes. Many would argue there is a greater moral hazard in continuing to glorify and monetize athletics, to make gods out of men.

If you want the exceptional student athletes to get paid for athletics abilities, let's distribute the proceeds across the team evenly. No team, no stars.

Normal students receive stipends for meeting qualified conditions, often need based but tied to academic performance. Please elaborate on the stipends you take issue with. These students do not receive access to the professional weight training, conditioning, facility use, or intensive tutoring and academic counseling benefits given to student athletes. For student athletes that need additional support for living expenses, cost of attendance increases should help. Students that have extraordinary needs, I would propose offering Federal work study or a similar, perhaps athletics specific, program. Let the stars go straight to the pros.

(05-04-2016 12:14 PM)BucNut22 Wrote:  

(05-04-2016 09:11 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  They are already starting to pay athletes Cost of attendance above what they are already getting for their scholarship. Tennessee was able to offer $5,666 now.
That was the largest in the NCAA when it first started, not sure if it still is.

The "Cost of Attendance" is not pay for play and the NCAA/schools have gone out of their way to make sure that it is not called or legally considered as such. COA was placated to make up the difference between what a college scholarship covers, and the actual cost of attending the college/university to include housing, books, etc. Which is the why the COA is different for every school.

COA is NOT stipend for play or services rendered, it is not based off a percentage of revenue.

I know all those things, It is a nod to I am playing sports for this college and I can't even buy a cheeseburger whining Also it will be and already has been used as a recruiting tool, schools with lower COA's have already been complaining.
Think about it, you are a solid 3* OL from say DB in Kingsport, nothing a Booster is going to buy your mom a car over but someone who could contribute. UT wants you, VT wants you, VT can offer you $2500, UT $5666.. That might tip the scales...

Quote:Any student put through a Federal work program is supposed to work for their scholarship in a way that supports operations or administration. You could place a dollar value on their time, and that presents in the form of hours required. It's up to the college that uses the student labor to use it effectively. The purpose is to employ low cost labor and help students in doing so.

For most if not all graduate, teaching, or research assistants, the work program is in addition to their scholarship for tuition & fees. If the NCAA/schools decided to employ the same model toward athletes for their time I actually think it would solve the issue for many. Though that would require the NCAA/schools to designate athletes as employees and bestow on them all the rights and benefits they have been working so hard to deny them for decades.

Quote:Let's consider the time commitments & guaranteed compensation for student athletes (guaranteed regardless of performance or the team winning, what really matters):

Student athletes are well supported with weight training and conditioning programs, medical attention, coaching, etc. and they are accommodated on travel. Most student athletes would have no access to this outside of a college program. They earn it by practicing, and in order to qualify for participation they maintain academic progress--the scholarship support some receive is awarded on a merit basis tied directly to athletic ability. Those that receive scholarship do so with no obligation to fill stats sheets or guarantee wins. For an out of state athlete, that could represent an opportunity cost over $100,000 to the university.

Weight training and conditioning programs, medical attention, coaching aren't handed out to athletes by the school for benevolent reasons. Schools do so to develop better players at the benefit of both the athlete and the program. What you're describing is akin to calling professional development compensation for employees within a standard business. Sure the athlete/employee benefits, but the primary reason for supplying the services is to benefit the business. At no time could you sell an employee that the professional development for which they are required to participate is compensation for their time/abilities.

While on the topic, you didn't actually discuss time commitments. The NCAA has a 20hrs limit on playing and practice during the season, 8hrs in the off season, which when combined with class, travel, medical rehab, and/or "voluntary" workouts and film study takes up a large portion of an athletes time. In addition, there are few limits on when the in the academic year an athlete can be required to play. Holiday breaks are not guaranteed or even likely, pre & post season tournaments can drag players off of campus for days/weeks at a time. There is no additional compensation for any of it.

Stat sheets and wins may not be tied to scholarships but athletes certainly have to meet the expectations of the program to remain on scholarship. Especially at schools that do no guarantee scholarships for 4 years (there are some conferences that do). Every year there are players who are not asked back or pushed to transfer who do not meet the athletic expectations of the coaching staff.

Quote:Winning is what you want to pay for. The school administration, the athletic dept, and years of organizational culture develop a winning brand that attracts players. The players gain as much in prestige as they give by attending major programs. They, collectively, as teams, win or lose games. The program, coaching, training, and medical are guaranteed to the players regardless of winning. (Well, they could always be cut from the team arbitrarily...it does happen, seemingly.)

Does prestige have a monetary value in your mind? I get being "big man on campus" has allure, but I don't know that I buy (no pun intended) the actual value or view it as compensation.

Theoretically winning may be what you want to pay for, and for tickets and merchandise that may still be the case. TV contracts are signed and payouts go out regardless of winning. Though winners obviously get put on TV more and earn more money.

Quote:Those few players that do individually make a statistically significant difference to winning would likely make it pro out of high school. Let them go straight to pro. Just because the commercial market is willing to pay someone for their time on film or their image in video games doesn't mean we are morally obligated to see that pay through to student athletes. Many would argue there is a greater moral hazard in continuing to glorify and monetize athletics, to make gods out of men.

If you want the exceptional student athletes to get paid for athletics abilities, let's distribute the proceeds across the team evenly. No team, no stars.

I don't want the exceptional student athlete to get paid for their athletic abilities. I actually agree that players should be paid across the team evenly, as is normally done for GAs and TAs. The players have collective worth and should be paid collectively IMO.

At the least end of the spectrum, we should not be PREVENTING athletes from earning income from their name/likeness. If someone wants to pay an athlete for their autograph there is no reason why the NCAA/school should prevent that. Schools auction off player signed merchandise for fund raisers, its hypocritical to tell the very same athlete he can profit off his own name.

Quote:Normal students receive stipends for meeting qualified conditions, often need based but tied to academic performance. Please elaborate on the stipends you take issue with. These students do not receive access to the professional weight training, conditioning, facility use, or intensive tutoring and academic counseling benefits given to student athletes. For student athletes that need additional support for living expenses, cost of attendance increases should help. Students that have extraordinary needs, I would propose offering Federal work study or a similar, perhaps athletics specific, program. Let the stars go straight to the pros.

I covered most of this above and actually agree with you on offering federal work study for athletics.

(05-04-2016 02:00 PM)BucNut22 Wrote:  

Quote:Any student put through a Federal work program is supposed to work for their scholarship in a way that supports operations or administration. You could place a dollar value on their time, and that presents in the form of hours required. It's up to the college that uses the student labor to use it effectively. The purpose is to employ low cost labor and help students in doing so.

For most if not all graduate, teaching, or research assistants, the work program is in addition to their scholarship for tuition & fees. If the NCAA/schools decided to employ the same model toward athletes for their time I actually think it would solve the issue for many. Though that would require the NCAA/schools to designate athletes as employees and bestow on them all the rights and benefits they have been working so hard to deny them for decades.

Quote:Let's consider the time commitments & guaranteed compensation for student athletes (guaranteed regardless of performance or the team winning, what really matters):

Student athletes are well supported with weight training and conditioning programs, medical attention, coaching, etc. and they are accommodated on travel. Most student athletes would have no access to this outside of a college program. They earn it by practicing, and in order to qualify for participation they maintain academic progress--the scholarship support some receive is awarded on a merit basis tied directly to athletic ability. Those that receive scholarship do so with no obligation to fill stats sheets or guarantee wins. For an out of state athlete, that could represent an opportunity cost over $100,000 to the university.

Weight training and conditioning programs, medical attention, coaching aren't handed out to athletes by the school for benevolent reasons. Schools do so to develop better players at the benefit of both the athlete and the program. What you're describing is akin to calling professional development compensation for employees within a standard business. Sure the athlete/employee benefits, but the primary reason for supplying the services is to benefit the business. At no time could you sell an employee that the professional development for which they are required to participate is compensation for their time/abilities.

While on the topic, you didn't actually discuss time commitments. The NCAA has a 20hrs limit on playing and practice during the season, 8hrs in the off season, which when combined with class, travel, medical rehab, and/or "voluntary" workouts and film study takes up a large portion of an athletes time. In addition, there are few limits on when the in the academic year an athlete can be required to play. Holiday breaks are not guaranteed or even likely, pre & post season tournaments can drag players off of campus for days/weeks at a time. There is no additional compensation for any of it.

Stat sheets and wins may not be tied to scholarships but athletes certainly have to meet the expectations of the program to remain on scholarship. Especially at schools that do no guarantee scholarships for 4 years (there are some conferences that do). Every year there are players who are not asked back or pushed to transfer who do not meet the athletic expectations of the coaching staff.

Quote:Winning is what you want to pay for. The school administration, the athletic dept, and years of organizational culture develop a winning brand that attracts players. The players gain as much in prestige as they give by attending major programs. They, collectively, as teams, win or lose games. The program, coaching, training, and medical are guaranteed to the players regardless of winning. (Well, they could always be cut from the team arbitrarily...it does happen, seemingly.)

Does prestige have a monetary value in your mind? I get being "big man on campus" has allure, but I don't know that I buy (no pun intended) the actual value or view it as compensation.

Theoretically winning may be what you want to pay for, and for tickets and merchandise that may still be the case. TV contracts are signed and payouts go out regardless of winning. Though winners obviously get put on TV more and earn more money.

Quote:Those few players that do individually make a statistically significant difference to winning would likely make it pro out of high school. Let them go straight to pro. Just because the commercial market is willing to pay someone for their time on film or their image in video games doesn't mean we are morally obligated to see that pay through to student athletes. Many would argue there is a greater moral hazard in continuing to glorify and monetize athletics, to make gods out of men.

If you want the exceptional student athletes to get paid for athletics abilities, let's distribute the proceeds across the team evenly. No team, no stars.

I don't want the exceptional student athlete to get paid for their athletic abilities. I actually agree that players should be paid across the team evenly, as is normally done for GAs and TAs. The players have collective worth and should be paid collectively IMO.

At the least end of the spectrum, we should not be PREVENTING athletes from earning income from their name/likeness. If someone wants to pay an athlete for their autograph there is no reason why the NCAA/school should prevent that. Schools auction off player signed merchandise for fund raisers, its hypocritical to tell the very same athlete he can profit off his own name.

Quote:Normal students receive stipends for meeting qualified conditions, often need based but tied to academic performance. Please elaborate on the stipends you take issue with. These students do not receive access to the professional weight training, conditioning, facility use, or intensive tutoring and academic counseling benefits given to student athletes. For student athletes that need additional support for living expenses, cost of attendance increases should help. Students that have extraordinary needs, I would propose offering Federal work study or a similar, perhaps athletics specific, program. Let the stars go straight to the pros.

I covered most of this above and actually agree with you on offering federal work study for athletics.

The way this dialogue is unfolding, I am questioning whether we are arguing, debating, or discussing....I really like your thoughts so far. I just gave my final academic presentation to receive my MBA on Saturday, and quite frankly, I'm a little tipsy right now celebrating. When I get back to this, let's continue. I think there's a good middle ground where athletes can be compensated without completely crapping on education and disrespecting the rest of the student body.

I would've thought Steve Grindstaff would be all over this TV commercial thing if it were legal.