NCAA: Pay-for-Play not coming

[NickZepp]

The problems with paying players are mostly equality. Basically only football and high football at that and some men's basketball programs would pay their players because of how it's currently set up. A few women's basketball programs and other sports would be added but not that many. Basically most sports would have to shut down because they couldn't afford to pay their players. If we got rid of scholarships and basically paid players some sort of performance based wage then you could maybe have pay for play.

 

[SoonerinNC]

Another thing to consider is the contacts that players who don't go pro have as a result of being a college athlete.

Letting the market determine the amounts paid sounds like Texas being able to pay more than the other Big 8 schools. (if they don't already).You want the rich to get richer then that is the way to go. Let's see the 5* quarterback gets the biggest check from the school with the deepest pockets.

You could eliminate football scolarships and then you would probably see a minor league system like baseball. OU's team would be something like Harvard and Yale. And the guys who now get an education out of their football skills would be paid according to their team's capability to pay and end up without an education.

I doubt that you could develop a system that would not be subject to a lot of abuse.

 

[NickZepp]

Yep and basically taking away scholarships takes away a lot of things that bench players for OU right now get. It would probably make going to college overall cheaper in the end. Because getting rid of scholarships would make a lot more things market based. But it wouldn't be cheap enough for college kids that aren't making a huge impact on the program. Basically bench players for football or basketball programs wouldn't get paid. Some freshmen that don't play right away wouldn't get paid most likely.

 

[thebigabd]

Worst example EVER!!

These kids have a choice. slaves did not.

They know what there signing into. If you don't like the deal don't sign it's as easy as that. You wanna get a steady paycheck quit playing sports and get a job, like the rest of us that are not lucky enough to be as talented as you.

What's next? We have to pay high school kids in sports? they generate money for their school. Pee wee?

You wanna see how fast college sports will go down in flames. Start paying players and you find out real quick. Yeah let's ruin this for everyone. The players will be the one shooting there self's in the foot in the long run. When theY got no college to showcase there skills to the pro's, what are they going to do then?

Again, I am comparing the concept of an institution (university, plantation, whatever) gaining enormous wealth on the back of mostly free labor. College programs give a dorm room, food, etc... basic necessities. In exchange, these players risk their health on the field, sell tickets, sign autographs, sell jerseys, and become part of the university "brand", if you will. The institution takes millions, the players take pennies. Pennies on the dollar. That is the comparison.

 

[JBaker]

As others have hinted at, it's completely infeasible due to federal law. Title IX would prevent any male athletes from receiving benefits not available to female athletes. Only schools that could afford to pay their women's players the same as their men would be able to remain in existence. Every non-revenue generating sport would need to be shut down.

The people arguing most vociferously for players being paid and "the market deciding their worth," lack even the most basic understanding of business and law.

The only way players being paid for the sale of their likeness is a possibility is something like this:
Every NCAA athlete is eligible to join the "NCAA Players' Union" upon their joining an NCAA sport. Representatives of that union could then negotiate licensing agreements with Nike, EA Sports, Under Armor, etc. Then, every single player that is a member of the union gets an equal cut of those licensing fees. That means for every Johnny Manziel jersey that is sold, Johnny Manziel gets the same exact cut as a women's volleyball player at North Carolina. If players chose not to join the union, they wouldn't get any cut, but their likeness is off limits.

It wouldn't amount to much pay per player, but it would be something.

 

[thebigabd]

As others have hinted at, it's completely infeasible due to federal law. Title IX would prevent any male athletes from receiving benefits not available to female athletes. Only schools that could afford to pay their women's players the same as their men would be able to remain in existence. Every non-revenue generating sport would need to be shut down.

The people arguing most vociferously for players being paid and "the market deciding their worth," lack even the most basic understanding of business and law.

The only way players being paid for the sale of their likeness is a possibility is something like this:
Every NCAA athlete is eligible to join the "NCAA Players' Union" upon their joining an NCAA sport. Representatives of that union could then negotiate licensing agreements with Nike, EA Sports, Under Armor, etc. Then, every single player that is a member of the union gets an equal cut of those licensing fees. That means for every Johnny Manziel jersey that is sold, Johnny Manziel gets the same exact cut as a women's volleyball player at North Carolina. If players chose not to join the union, they wouldn't get any cut, but their likeness is off limits.

It wouldn't amount to much pay per player, but it would be something.

I was thinking their source of income would come from areas that have to do with their "brand" or "likeness". For example, if the players want to charge for autographs, let them do that. If they want to sell jerseys with their name and/or number on it, sure, let them do that. If Nike wants to sign Johnny Manziel to do commercials or something, why not? If the university sells merchandise like posters, jerseys, etc to profit off the player, that player should get a piece of that.

Why does it have to be equal for everyone? That's not how business works in any other context. I wouldn't expect people to buy a jersey that said "thebigabd" on it, because I suck at football. But if you are exceptional and can market yourself, people could/should be able to buy your product.

If there is no market for selling merchandise from the girls equestrian team, well, then those athletes wouldn't have a market.

Let these athletes be entrepreneurs and profit off themselves, if there is a demand for it.

None of that requires that the university pay them a salary.

 

[NickZepp]

You are preaching to the choir with me on most of that. But that's not how college will ever work. It'll always be under a liberal-socialist thing that believes that college students shouldn't have to pay to go to college. Yet these ideas have seen college tuition go way up. BTW if we did have pay for play like you want. I'm not sure if OU basketball players get paid.

 

[skyvue]

You are preaching to the choir with me on most of that. But that's not how college will ever work. It'll always be under a liberal-socialist thing that believes that college students shouldn't have to pay to go to college. Yet these ideas have seen college tuition go way up. BTW if we did have pay for play like you want. I'm not sure if OU basketball players get paid.

could we leave politics out of this, please?

 

[NickZepp]

If we want to see pay for play really instituted it would have to be through politics and would have to involve getting rid of scholarships as we know them and title IX. Neither of which will ever happen.

 

[skyvue]

OK, I'll rephrase: could we leave the knee-jerk, hyperbolic, divisive, partisan politics out of this, please?

 

[WTSooner]

smh

If some of you don't see the can of worms that paying players, or my God, letting the market determine what they are worth, would open, you are truly living under a rock. If you think there is cheating going on now, there would be more of it if players were paid. And not only that, but that parity that college football has worked hard to move towards, would be gone in a flash. The schools with the money.....the schools with the donors that have the money, would be buying players left and right.

Since it is tough for athletes to get jobs under the rules, I agree they should have access to a certain amount of funding. I'm under the impression they already get some money. I imagine it is probably enough, but it if isn't, bump it up. Or like Gary said, make sure they have access to things such as pell grants.

Nobody has to go to college for 4 years. And honestly, without the sport they play, I'd say a majority of them would have no business being in college to begin with.

 

[thebigabd]

OK, I'll rephrase: could we leave the knee-jerk, hyperbolic, divisive, partisan politics out of this, please?

What other kind of politics are there?

If some of you don't see the can of worms that paying players, or my God, letting the market determine what they are worth, would open, you are truly living under a rock. If you think there is cheating going on now, there would be more of it if players were paid. And not only that, but that parity that college football has worked hard to move towards, would be gone in a flash. The schools with the money.....the schools with the donors that have the money, would be buying players left and right.

You mean teams like Alabama, LSU, Ohio State, Oklahoma, etc would be better than other teams year after year? That would be crazy!

Plus, I think the "market" for high school stars is much less than after they become famous in college. On top of that, only a small handful of these guys (high school or college) are considered "stars".

But regardless, I think people are so entrenched in the idea that paying players will equal cheating that you can't think out of the box a little here.

Let's say that I was 16 years and was an extraordinary musician. People would pay me money to perform at their arena, right? Should I not be able to profit from my God-given talent? Nobody would tell a musician, an artist, an author, or anyone else no. But we tell football players no?

If people, on their own free will, are willing to give some extraordinary athlete money to do a commercial, sign a photo, speak at an event, or encourage them to come play for at a particular school, who cares.

For players that are good enough to warrant being paid, football is their job. For players that aren't, football is their way into school or something they simply enjoy doing.

Nobody has to go to college for 4 years. And honestly, without the sport they play, I'd say a majority of them would have no business being in college to begin with.

Or they would have other options, if they were financially unable to pay, to go for free such as pell grants.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/s...ent-mark-emmert-insists-pay-play-model-coming

I love how this clown for the NCAA says that the school pays $100,000 per athlete, and A&M states they have only made $20,000 on Manziel. Using the A&M example, numbers show that donations have increased 70% up to about $740,000,0000 at A&M since Manziel became the starting quarterback.

This is one of those issues where I have a hard time seeing the other side of the story. Schools make millions of dollars off their athletes, in return for their athletes getting to take college classes for free. When I decided to go to graduate school and didn't want to pay for it, I got a job at the school. I didn't generate millions of dollars for the university and still got free classes. If I did generate millions for the school, you can bet I would want a piece of that action.

If you don't like it, go pro. Nobody is making them play football for a free education.

Life is so tough for them athletes

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If I can convince someone to buy my photograph, or buy my jersey, or play a video game because I am in it, I should be able to profit from that.

you can....but not while having a scholarship. go pro. it's easy

 

[SoonerBounce13]

So you agree they are paid....all we are arguing about is the amount. I say let the free market determine the appropriate amount.

College athletics would be over. think about it man. It would absolutely kill any parity and business would be even shadier than it is now

 

[SoonerBounce13]

Should I not be able to profit from my God-given talent? Nobody would tell a musician, an artist, an author, or anyone else no. But we tell football players no?

You can profit from it. I don't understand the problem. We don't tell football players no

 

[thebigabd]

If you don't like it, go pro. Nobody is making them play football for a free education.

Life is so tough for them athletes

They can't go pro. You have to be three years removed from high school to be in the NFL.

 

[BCSooners]

I was thinking their source of income would come from areas that have to do with their "brand" or "likeness". For example, if the players want to charge for autographs, let them do that. If they want to sell jerseys with their name and/or number on it, sure, let them do that. If Nike wants to sign Johnny Manziel to do commercials or something, why not? If the university sells merchandise like posters, jerseys, etc to profit off the player, that player should get a piece of that.

Why does it have to be equal for everyone? That's not how business works in any other context. I wouldn't expect people to buy a jersey that said "thebigabd" on it, because I suck at football. But if you are exceptional and can market yourself, people could/should be able to buy your product.

If there is no market for selling merchandise from the girls equestrian team, well, then those athletes wouldn't have a market.

Let these athletes be entrepreneurs and profit off themselves, if there is a demand for it.

None of that requires that the university pay them a salary.

This is absurd. Say a Manziel autograph is worth $50, you would have a booster pay him $10,000 for the autograph. Teams with the most money would buy the best players, you wouldn't have any local stars go to their home school to try and ressurect it i.e. Jake Locker.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

They can't go pro. You have to be three years removed from high school to be in the NFL.

NFL isn't the only option.

 

[BCSooners]

Even though at the time we were very competitive, but Blake Griffin never comes to OU.