B....I....N....G....O.
The difference is staggering. And extremely unfair.
Texas. Notre Dame.
The rich getting richer at the poor school's expense.
XFL has the SEC worried?
- Thread starter steelcurtain55.
- Start date
The difference is staggering. And extremely unfair.
Texas. Notre Dame.
The rich getting richer at the poor school's expense.
honestly, this idea would create more of a disadvantage than flat out paying players. Seriously, it would be disastrous. If you want to destroy college athletics with how we know it now, this more than anything would do it..
I don't agree with paying players, but at least it would be the same at each school. No unfair recruiting advantage built in.
yep, a flat rate I guess but then you have to do it for all athletes and well most schools cant afford this but yes, if you are gonna do it, this would be the only way...
Maybe a different rate per sport. T&F wouldn't get as much as basketball or football. I'm not sure how "fair" would be figured.
Yeah. "Zero-hour" contractors? Would be nearly impossible for an organization the size of Pitt to issue another eighty-five 1099's every year. But if they were actual, at-will employees, there would be real teeth behind enforcement of federal tax law issues for schools that cheat. I'd guess that's where this goes to die because universities are the ultimate tax dodge.
that would cause hell with the metoo crowd. cost of living you can get away with, different pay for different sports, aka womens' sports, yeah, we'd have short haired husky women marching down forbes with pitchforks..
which im kind of into in a weird way but that's for another thread..
yeah, i'll leave that one alone. no one wants to hear this elaborated on, including me.. Im a sick man..Hopefully that thread will be on another board.
I think everyone is forgetting that if college athletes are somehow paid that it will be the bare minimum. There isn't going to be that much disparity between Power 5 Conference schools since they'll collude to keep the amount they have to dole out down, they'll most likely pool a very small percentage of media and merchandise money and give the athletes a standard amount across the board. A big star at Alabama is going to end up getting the same $500 a week check that a bench warmer at Pitt will get, the big disparity will be for the Group of 5 schools who'll be left in the cold when the NCAA allows the P5 schools form their own subdivision.
Maybe initially but then the arms race will be right around the corner there too,
I keep hearing that they want to be able to compensate for the player's likeness. There would be a much bigger check for the likeness of a player at a big blue blood school than a smaller P5 school.
I've heard nothing about sharing the money in a pool. Each player could be compensated for his own likeness.
Lifetime free tuition for any scholarship athlete.
That's the answer .
The school u play for is now obligated to compensate you not in hard dollars, but in opportunity to better yourself long after your final game.
Educating individuals....isnt what these schools are supposed to be doing?
A kid leaves Pitt after playing ball but is shy of a degree. He goes to work...gets as far as he can and now wants to better himself 10 years down the road.
He now has the opportunity to make a life for himself that he wasn't concerned about at age 21.
If the schools go this route, it puts to bed once and for all the can of worms that gets opened by paying them. The playing field wont get any more lopsided by the big boys.
I will be back with the same post the next time this gets discussed.
That's the answer .
The school u play for is now obligated to compensate you not in hard dollars, but in opportunity to better yourself long after your final game.
Educating individuals....isnt what these schools are supposed to be doing?
A kid leaves Pitt after playing ball but is shy of a degree. He goes to work...gets as far as he can and now wants to better himself 10 years down the road.
He now has the opportunity to make a life for himself that he wasn't concerned about at age 21.
If the schools go this route, it puts to bed once and for all the can of worms that gets opened by paying them. The playing field wont get any more lopsided by the big boys.
I will be back with the same post the next time this gets discussed.
Good post!
I was listening to The Fan one day and this was being discussed.
A Fan host said college players on scholarship have a lifetime to use the scholarship ???
No callers challenged the host and I think The Fan host was wrong.
Your proposal makes sense.
Paying players would be a "huge can of worms" for Universities due to cost, admin work and liability.
Signed: Chowderhead!
Many schools have undisclosed programs for former athletes to return to school to earn their degree.
I don't think pitt is one of them. didn't some athletes recently complain about pitt not paying their spring semester tuition? We aren't paying current athletes' tuition we sure as heck aint picking up the bill for non students returning to school.
Where are the kids going to learn the game? If there are no high school teams or even Pop Warner? You'd have to have a travel team model or something. And club teams. And who's going to pay? How will you know who's any good if they haven't been playing? And all the kids from poor neighborhoods like Clairton or Alliquippa can their parents afford to buy them the gear the school gives them now and pay fees for travel teams? Who's going to pay the coaches?
The compensation for player likeness was mostly concerning the NCAA branded video games that basically had the players in it but would just list them as Pitt QB#3 and so on. In that situation just like with the Madden, NBA, NHL and MLB games all players who's likeness is in the game would get royalty checks. There was a lawsuit filed by former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon over then because EA Sports used his likeness in one of the NCAA Basketball games that had "classic" teams on it.
Not only is allowing players to be paid for their likeness dangerous for the reasons mentioned another one is it will open the door for even more rampant cheating. 5 star kid from MD is thinking of going to ND because that will help him to sell more jerseys, MD super rich UA donor says go to MD I will buy 100k of your jerseys.
1. Or Paris or Milan or Madrid.
2. If you take 10 of the top 20 or 20 of the top 30 or 40 players out of NCAA basketball most people wouldn't notice the difference. The proof of that is that if you ask your random NCAA basketball fan who the top 10 high school seniors in the country are almost none of them would know. And then if you asked some of those who do know to actually describe the games of those 10 players and even fewer would have any idea.
No, they don't have to not exist, they could just go back to it being all D3, the teams could just be whatever regular students show up to tryout. I'd still watch say, Pitt vs. CMU with D3 level players over minor league pro teams of high level D1 type players, Because I want to watch Pitt THE SCHOOL over watching the best players.
My bad. But my comment is still valid, you can always continue to have college sports, even if the issue of pay kills off the D1 sports. You could have sports as a student activity, like it was originally intended.
so you want it as a non revenue sport, almost like a club sport. ok, that's your opinion. if that happens, we can move games to an empty field somewhere closer to campus, fans can bring chairs and line them up along field. Ball goes out of bounds, you or one of the parents can go get it for them.
Sure, lets do this. i'll meet you there, i'll bring a chair and a cooler of beer. we can set up on the 40 yard line, our kids can run around behind us and play while we watch a game..
I don't "want it" to become that way, I'm saying it would become more like W&J or Mt. Union, maybe you'd have a 10000 seat stadium, and I'd still go and watch.
Do you really think the NCAA and the schools will have a system where a player would even see a some what reasonable portion of jersey sales? Everyone keeps forgetting that the NCAA and 99% of the schools out there are greedy as hell and will set-up a system that barely pays the athletes anything. All of these OMG wealthy donors will do this and that is goofy talk since they already do shady stuff and promise these recruits everything under the sun.
Those games could have stayed around if the NCAA would have allowed the players compensation for using their likeness, but the NCAA said no so it wouldn't set any kind of precedent. Since those games had every D1 team a player from Alabama would have gotten the same amount per royalty check that a player from Akron would have.
Last edited:
I'm fine with mandating the paying of players.
"It'll end football at Pitt". Like Steve Martin said, if the pope sh*ts in the woods, who would notice? Maybe it SHOULD end. As maybe it should at 80%-90% of other schools that also have completely zero chance or intent of ever competing for a championship.
However... why does anyone think that the cheating that occurs today would go away or lessen in the least?
"It'll end football at Pitt". Like Steve Martin said, if the pope sh*ts in the woods, who would notice? Maybe it SHOULD end. As maybe it should at 80%-90% of other schools that also have completely zero chance or intent of ever competing for a championship.
However... why does anyone think that the cheating that occurs today would go away or lessen in the least?
I would hope it would go on, as a D3 sport or some way, I'd remain a Pitt fan and still watch the games over Bama PRO vs. Clemson PRO.
Similar threads
