Several years ago, I believe in a Sports Illustrated article (possibly by or including comments by Frank DeFord) a system was proposed by a writer for paying college athletes to play for their respective schools, without requiring them to attend that college or university as students concurrently. The argument, as I recall was that college athletics had evolved into basically university marketing, and away from the idea of an activity to pursue for students akin to intramural sports.

In addition to the schools paying market rate for the services of the athletes employed to represent their school in the different sports the school chose to participate in, a full academic scholarship would await each respective athlete to be used once his playing days were finished, whether just college or pro, or could be used concurrently with his chosen athletic career as a pro, or while he was employed representing the school subject to the same academic admissions policies of the school as regular student body.

This had the effect of admitting that for most cases, athletes were actually athletes first, and students second; they were more usually focused on their athletic careers and less so on academics until after their athletic careers were over or substantially over, but still allows them to gain a fair, market-based benefit from their athletic skills, while giving them a bonus of a scholarship that would greatly reduce and in some cases eliminate the inherent conflict of interest many experience trying to be student athletes, when they were in fact athletes who were barely students.

Granted, Rice tries very hard to live up to the originally intended ideal of student athlete, but even here it can be a difficult situation. I like the idea of letting the kids play their sport first, and be fairly compensated for it, and let them know that their academic scholarship can be used in the future at any time, subject to the same regular student admission standards for that school. I think it would make Rice a more attractive option in many cases.

I'll stop with that. Thoughts from the board?

eta-spelling.

(01-22-2014 11:21 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  If paying players becomes the norm in D-1, then I support a move to D-3. At that point intercollegiate athletics will have lost all connection to any valid purpose of a university. The only justification for paying players is that the "degrees" that they are receiving are totally worthless. If their education is worth hundreds of thousands, that's compensation enough.

We have a sham (meaningless "degrees" obtained after worthless "education"). Rather than fix the sham, lets paper over it.

I have to agree with this.
The farce can only go so far. At some point an institution with honor has to go take a shower, to wash the stench off.

If the number of allowed baseball scholarships goes up, then Rice would probably go for the maximum allowed. Rice fans are willing to give to be at the top level in baseball because that program is successful. It is harder to get gifts to keep up in football and basketball since we are not already competitive with the top teams. With a full scholarship, baseball recruits would not worry about the difference in tuition costs-Rice v an ESU since it would be zero.

(01-22-2014 08:57 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  I wonder is the spending autonomy will extend to equivalency (i.e. partial scholarship) sports? In baseball especially, one of the biggest structural factors that allows private schools to stay competitive is that even at the ESUs, recruits are still paying a good portion of their own way -- which means that recruits who have no interest in investing in education skip college altogether and go to the minors, which makes college baseball a more truly collegiate sport. But if the ESUs can effectively make baseball a full-scholarship sport, they instantly expand the recruiting pool in a way that does NOT favor schools like Rice.

The problem with that is we could athletes play for Rice and then wind up having to get a lesser degree because Rice would not admit them. One advantage of a Rice offer is that they get into Rice. Their athletic skill gets them an advantage to get into Rice if they are already a discretionary admit which means they are solid college material but not someone would stand out otherwise in the very selective admission process.

(01-22-2014 08:50 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Several years ago, I believe in a Sports Illustrated article (possibly by or including comments by Frank DeFord) a system was proposed by a writer for paying college athletes to play for their respective schools, without requiring them to attend that college or university as students concurrently. The argument, as I recall was that college athletics had evolved into basically university marketing, and away from the idea of an activity to pursue for students akin to intramural sports.

In addition to the schools paying market rate for the services of the athletes employed to represent their school in the different sports the school chose to participate in, a full academic scholarship would await each respective athlete to be used once his playing days were finished, whether just college or pro, or could be used concurrently with his chosen athletic career as a pro, or while he was employed representing the school subject to the same academic admissions policies of the school as regular student body.

This had the effect of admitting that for most cases, athletes were actually athletes first, and students second; they were more usually focused on their athletic careers and less so on academics until after their athletic careers were over or substantially over, but still allows them to gain a fair, market-based benefit from their athletic skills, while giving them a bonus of a scholarship that would greatly reduce and in some cases eliminate the inherent conflict of interest many experience trying to be student athletes, when they were in fact athletes who were barely students.

Granted, Rice tries very hard to live up to the originally intended ideal of student athlete, but even here it can be a difficult situation. I like the idea of letting the kids play their sport first, and be fairly compensated for it, and let them know that their academic scholarship can be used in the future at any time, subject to the same regular student admission standards for that school. I think it would make Rice a more attractive option in many cases.

I'll stop with that. Thoughts from the board?

eta-spelling.

In the early 1970s, football players were getting $15 a month laundry money. I can understand a payment under $100 a month for uncovered expenses but not enough to get them a sports car to use to get in trouble.

(01-22-2014 01:11 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(01-22-2014 11:21 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  If paying players becomes the norm in D-1, then I support a move to D-3. At that point intercollegiate athletics will have lost all connection to any valid purpose of a university. The only justification for paying players is that the "degrees" that they are receiving are totally worthless. If their education is worth hundreds of thousands, that's compensation enough.

We have a sham (meaningless "degrees" obtained after worthless "education"). Rather than fix the sham, lets paper over it.

Other than going down to D-3, I agree with your statement. Players shouldn't be paid anything. They can be employed by the university over the summer months, while they aren't in class. Athletes can work like everyone else. These kids are treated like kings and queens on campus. Their education, food and housing are all completely paid for. Anyway, aren't college student supposed to be poor?

(01-23-2014 02:14 AM)75src Wrote:  If the number of allowed baseball scholarships goes up, then Rice would probably go for the maximum allowed. Rice fans are willing to give to be at the top level in baseball because that program is successful. It is harder to get gifts to keep up in football and basketball since we are not already competitive with the top teams. With a full scholarship, baseball recruits would not worry about the difference in tuition costs-Rice v an ESU since it would be zero.

(01-22-2014 08:57 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  I wonder is the spending autonomy will extend to equivalency (i.e. partial scholarship) sports? In baseball especially, one of the biggest structural factors that allows private schools to stay competitive is that even at the ESUs, recruits are still paying a good portion of their own way -- which means that recruits who have no interest in investing in education skip college altogether and go to the minors, which makes college baseball a more truly collegiate sport. But if the ESUs can effectively make baseball a full-scholarship sport, they instantly expand the recruiting pool in a way that does NOT favor schools like Rice.

I don't disagree, but we are addressing different points -- like two ships passing in the night. I have no doubt that in baseball (though perhaps not in other equivalency sports) Rice would match what other top programs offer. But that's only one part of the story. The other part is that even with the current tuition differential, the fact that college baseball recruiting is currently limited mostly to families who have at least some interest in investing in education is a HUGE structural factor that levels the recruiting playing field AT A LEVEL at which Rice is well-positioned to compete. Currently, it's not just Rice that has to focus its baseball recruiting on middle-class kids from educationally motivated families -- other schools have to also, and Rice getting the very best players from THAT pool is achievable. Change the pool dramatically, and Rice's ability to get the best players from a much larger, less education-oriented pool is much less.

Whether the disadvantge to Rice of this pool effect would outweigh the advantage of closing the tuition gap is uncertain, but the examples of football and basketball suggest that it would -- dramatically and irrevocably, I fear.

I would rather see the NFL start a minor league system (less extensive than MLB though) to allow players who just don't give a damn about school to skip it and get paid.

(01-23-2014 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I would rather see the NFL start a minor league system (less extensive than MLB though) to allow players who just don't give a damn about school to skip it and get paid.

me too.

FTR - if college football turns into college sponsored minor leagues, I also agree that it is time for Rice to walk away and find a place in amateur athletics (be it in D1, D3 or something else)

(01-23-2014 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I would rather see the NFL start a minor league system (less extensive than MLB though) to allow players who just don't give a damn about school to skip it and get paid.

Amen -- probably a pipe dream, but we're allowed to dream. The existence of minor league baseball is one of the best things going for college baseball.

(01-22-2014 08:50 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Several years ago, I believe in a Sports Illustrated article (possibly by or including comments by Frank DeFord) a system was proposed by a writer for paying college athletes to play for their respective schools, without requiring them to attend that college or university as students concurrently. The argument, as I recall was that college athletics had evolved into basically university marketing, and away from the idea of an activity to pursue for students akin to intramural sports.

In addition to the schools paying market rate for the services of the athletes employed to represent their school in the different sports the school chose to participate in, a full academic scholarship would await each respective athlete to be used once his playing days were finished, whether just college or pro, or could be used concurrently with his chosen athletic career as a pro, or while he was employed representing the school subject to the same academic admissions policies of the school as regular student body.

This had the effect of admitting that for most cases, athletes were actually athletes first, and students second; they were more usually focused on their athletic careers and less so on academics until after their athletic careers were over or substantially over, but still allows them to gain a fair, market-based benefit from their athletic skills, while giving them a bonus of a scholarship that would greatly reduce and in some cases eliminate the inherent conflict of interest many experience trying to be student athletes, when they were in fact athletes who were barely students.

Granted, Rice tries very hard to live up to the originally intended ideal of student athlete, but even here it can be a difficult situation. I like the idea of letting the kids play their sport first, and be fairly compensated for it, and let them know that their academic scholarship can be used in the future at any time, subject to the same regular student admission standards for that school. I think it would make Rice a more attractive option in many cases.

I'll stop with that. Thoughts from the board?

eta-spelling.

For a while I have that sooner or later the major "college football" teams will in effect be minor league teams. They will pay their players, not require them to attend class, etc. Their affiliation with the universities themselves will be akin to those of religious denominations and the schools that used to be part of them (Baylor, SMU, TCU, etc). The problem with this is that there will be in effect no seperation between them and the NFL. What made college football so interesting and so full of passion was its traditions, college loyalties and such which are now disappearing. So rather than watching a passionless game of minor league football people will end up not following this and either give up and/or follow the NFL more intently.

Universities such as Rice will probably form a completely different division that keeps the spirit of college athletics intact. In such a division, we will thrive and fans will come to watch us in person and on TV. I wouldn't be surprised that we even average 40,000 per game. The big schools such as UT, OU, A&M , et al. will notice this and will then form their own teams to play at this level so as not to lose any money. Of course, the NCAA will allow them and we will end up playing them as well.

(01-23-2014 01:52 PM)Rice81 Wrote:  Universities such as Rice will probably form a completely different division that keeps the spirit of college athletics intact. In such a division, we will thrive and fans will come to watch us in person and on TV. I wouldn't be surprised that we even average 40,000 per game. The big schools such as UT, OU, A&M , et al. will notice this and will then form their own teams to play at this level so as not to lose any money. Of course, the NCAA will allow them and we will end up playing them as well.

Based on the lucrative TV contracts and heavily attended games that the Ivy League and other FCS programs currently enjoy?

(01-23-2014 01:52 PM)Rice81 Wrote:  Universities such as Rice will probably form a completely different division that keeps the spirit of college athletics intact. In such a division, we will thrive and fans will come to watch us in person and on TV. I wouldn't be surprised that we even average 40,000 per game. The big schools such as UT, OU, A&M , et al. will notice this and will then form their own teams to play at this level so as not to lose any money. Of course, the NCAA will allow them and we will end up playing them as well.

Universities such as Rice currently play in a way to keep the spirit of college athletics intact. Most people couldn't care less.

Or did i miss the sarcasm in your post?

(01-23-2014 11:29 AM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 10:54 AM)mrbig Wrote:  I would rather see the NFL start a minor league system (less extensive than MLB though) to allow players who just don't give a damn about school to skip it and get paid.

Amen -- probably a pipe dream, but we're allowed to dream. The existence of minor league baseball is one of the best things going for college baseball.

Yes, this absolutely would be great.

(01-23-2014 03:02 PM)Antarius Wrote:  

(01-23-2014 01:52 PM)Rice81 Wrote:  Universities such as Rice will probably form a completely different division that keeps the spirit of college athletics intact. In such a division, we will thrive and fans will come to watch us in person and on TV. I wouldn't be surprised that we even average 40,000 per game. The big schools such as UT, OU, A&M , et al. will notice this and will then form their own teams to play at this level so as not to lose any money. Of course, the NCAA will allow them and we will end up playing them as well.

Universities such as Rice currently play in a way to keep the spirit of college athletics intact. Most people couldn't care less.

Or did i miss the sarcasm in your post?

I'm guessing no sarcasm was intended. Not totally implausible.
A scenario like this might in fact be the tsunami that would be needed for the long dreamed of Magnolia League to form!

Wouldn't Title IX have to be some sort of consideration if schools started paying stipends?