Question: Payment to star players?

I wouldn't be totally opposed to this. It might even lead to a lot more players staying in school rather than jumping to the pros.

I can see it now, every Oregon football player would have their own personal shoe deal & clothing line with Nike, personally negotiated by Phil Knight, himself. No telling how T. Boone Pickens could manipulate the market.

Pandora's box, bro.

CHATTBRIT said:

I was watching a rerun of SEC Tonight just now and Brady Ackerman came up with a great solution to this amateur-status problem. He suggested the NCAA adopt International Olympic Committee (IOC) rules adopted in the 1980's whereby an athlete cannot be paid for participating in their sport but if they can make revenue away from the sport, go for it. He gave the example of Michael Phelps hawking Subway. He gets paid and the integrity of the sport remains. See link below.

I think it is a brilliant way for the star players to make money and the market forces determining which players are utilized. This would also help cash strapped universities from having to come up with cash to pay their players. Let the market determine which players earn money.

www.csssports.com/blog/bradys-blackboard/cure-summer-blues-brady-solution

Click to expand...

I like it too. I agree that something like this should be implemented. But we gotta be careful that schools don't abuse it. How do we be sure that a booster of a school (who owns a company) gives that player an "endorsement"? There's gotta be a way to do that.

What happens when a select few get paid and the rest don't?

BamaInMo1 said:

What happens when a select few get paid and the rest don't?

Click to expand...

Exactly..Unless there's a sponsor for every star athlete, right or wrong, there's simply no way this will ever happen..

And how about this idea creeping down to the high school level? There are some pretty young Olympians.

And the NCAA will be monitoring this , correct ?

I think it is quite sad how the value of an education is so worthless to so many in our society now that we try and convince ourselves that these college kids must be paid to play a sport at the school they attend.

Many high schools around the country make a lot of money off of football and other sports, should those high school players be compensated for that as well?

I'm sorry but, I will always be 100% against paying college athletes anything. The free education should be enough IMO. For those that are talented enough, the NFL will be there for your payday. For those who are not, the education earned will provide you the opportunity to earn a living after college. Now, if the NCAA wants to increase stipends so the players have some extra "coke" money, I'm fine with that. Endorsements are a bad idea IMO.

CHATTBRIT said:

This would also help cash strapped universities from having to come up with cash to pay their players. Let the market determine which players earn money.

Click to expand...

How about this, the cash strapped universities can cut back on their athletic department, perhaps their football program?

They want to spend with the Alabamas of the world, but in order to do so they want the Alabamas to be held back....

BamaInMo1 said:

What happens when a select few get paid and the rest don't?

Click to expand...

There would be jealousy on the team. There would be divisiveness instead of UNITY on a team unless ALL get in on the action. If some got more than others, there would still be a lack of UNITY, cohesiveness.

Because of that, it would be hard to win. I agree with the poster regarding Oregon and Oklahoma State (T. Boone Pickens). Some schools would have more CLOUT than others because of the wealth of Boosters like Mr. Nike?!.? and T. Boone P.

I guess you could get rid of their scholarships and just pay them. Let them pay to go to school with those BIG Bucks.

dirtroadlizard said:

And the NCAA will be monitoring this , correct ?

Click to expand...

The NCAA is a joke. Many key people in enforcement have left the NCAA in the past year. Mr. Johnny Football will be playing this year because the
NCAA will be unable to prove he did anything wrong (whether he did or not). If he is found to be guilty, Bama will be penalized for
his infractions. That's just the way the NCAA works.

bamacpa70 said:

I can see it now, every Oregon football player would have their own personal shoe deal & clothing line with Nike, personally negotiated by Phil Knight, himself. No telling how T. Boone Pickens could manipulate the market.

Pandora's box, bro.

Click to expand...

and that is exactly why they don't allow it. Boosters would be promissing high school kids endorsement deals for joining their schools. UT kids would have pilot travel center deals, Auburn kids doing ads for yellow wood etc. Pandora's box indeed

Michael Phelps got paid to swim. The world championships has prize money. Same goes for track and field. Usain Bolt, for example, gets a six figure appearance fee for many track meets, not to mention prize money for winning.

So, a free education costing hundreds of thousands of dollars is not enough? smh

JIB said:

Michael Phelps got paid to swim. The world championships has prize money. Same goes for track and field. Usain Bolt, for example, gets a six figure appearance fee for many track meets, not to mention prize money for winning.

Click to expand...

I think amateurism in Olympics went away a while ago. At least with the dream team if not before.

JIB said:

Michael Phelps got paid to swim. The world championships has prize money. Same goes for track and field. Usain Bolt, for example, gets a six figure appearance fee for many track meets, not to mention prize money for winning.

Click to expand...

And along those lines I think you have a logical way to reward players financially.

Have the organizers of all post season football games, provide a pool to pay the players from. The winning players from any bowl game, conference championship game, etc... would be paid their cut. I imagine you'd give a lesser sum to the players from the losing side. It wouldn't have to be a crazy sum, but imagine if players were told, for instance, that they'd get 10,000 for winning the BCSCG. That would put the emphasis on winning wouldn't it?

It's also somewhat fair and logical, because these games are in essence additional demands on their time. They are under an athletic scholarship, but for instance one player only has to play the regular season, while in the future an SEC player might have the SECCG, then both round of the playoffs. It makes sense to compensate them for the additional games.

This was quite publicized earlier this year in an article by Dan Wetzel.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ncaaf-...s-should-get-endorsement-deals-224448879.html

CHATTBRIT said:

I was watching a rerun of SEC Tonight just now and Brady Ackerman came up with a great solution to this amateur-status problem. He suggested the NCAA adopt International Olympic Committee (IOC) rules adopted in the 1980's whereby an athlete cannot be paid for participating in their sport but if they can make revenue away from the sport, go for it. He gave the example of Michael Phelps hawking Subway. He gets paid and the integrity of the sport remains.

I think it is a brilliant way for the star players to make money and the market forces determining which players are utilized. This would also help cash strapped universities from having to come up with cash to pay their players. Let the market determine which players earn money.

Click to expand...

It would double Notre Dames built in recruiting advantage.