Paying Players

cmmiller711 said:

i do not understand how any of you can't take a step back from your argument and see that its insane to think that all accountants should make the same amount of money. or all computer programmers. all players are not equal. their market value is not equal. we are fine with it in literally every profession on planet earth but someone can run fast and its "ohhh no they cant make money until theyre 21. and even then they cant make as much as their really worth because the higher ups need to make money too!! we cant let the market regulate itself!!!"

Click to expand...

The market is called the NFL today, the 3 year from high school rule is nfl's rule. There are no laws stopping a business from creating a minor league for kids out of high school, the free market is alive and well, it happens to say no to the thought of sinking millions in to thousands of kids out of high school. Only at bama does anything like 50% of 5 stars make the pros, and that is the creme da la creme, so a free education is immensely valuable to the vast majority of these kids. The money that would be paid to athletes where would it come from facilities that help develop nfl talent (ie future job), coaches, the support staff that keeps then on track (out of trouble and on track to non-nfl jobs), from non-football sports, medical, nutrition, etc, etc, etc. Just increase prices when attendance is an issue already?
OK so we pay the athletes lets start the bidding for Tua, then Q, then mack, etc till you have a roster, then where does the money come from?

Wakecrash said:

The market is called the NFL today, the 3 year from high school rule is nfl's rule. There are no laws stopping a business from creating a minor league for kids out of high school, the free market is alive and well, it happens to say no to the thought of sinking millions in to thousands of kids out of high school. Only at bama does anything like 50% of 5 stars make the pros, and that is the creme da la creme, so a free education is immensely valuable to the vast majority of these kids. The money that would be paid to athletes where would it come from facilities that help develop nfl talent (ie future job), coaches, the support staff that keeps then on track (out of trouble and on track to non-nfl jobs), from non-football sports, medical, nutrition, etc, etc, etc. Just increase prices when attendance is an issue already?
OK so we pay the athletes lets start the bidding for Tua, then Q, then mack, etc till you have a roster, then where does the money come from?

Click to expand...

if you think the NCAA and the NFL dont have an understanding about using college as a minor league to save the NFL money/make the NCAA money, you are out of your mind. Every pro sport busts more than half their top draft picks, especially baseball bc they draft so young. no different in college recruiting. UK soccer clubs sign kids at like 12 years old and pay them to train in their farm system from then until theyre old enough to play in the premier league. The NCAA IS the NFL's minor league and no recourse or alternate route is given to kids. they have to play broke and risk ending their careers for no compensation while the schools/conferences/coaches/tv networks get rich and that is WRONG. POWER TO THE PLAYERS!

Wakecrash said:

The market is called the NFL today

Click to expand...

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/31/...ore-like-the-pros-73-billion-for-a-start.html

Espn pays $608 million a year to broadcast just the New Years bowls and the CFP. not to mention the billion+ to broadcast the regular season per year. that doesnt even include CBS or FOX. or ticket sales/merch sales for that matter. is that not a market? are the college players not forced to participate in that market for no money in order to hopefully make money one day? that is what's known as a racket my friend.

Wakecrash said:

OK so we pay the athletes lets start the bidding for Tua, then Q, then mack, etc till you have a roster, then where does the money come from?

Click to expand...

Alabamas football program generates more profit per year than most major league baseball annual payrolls. the free market would dictate itself and the available money would be spent accordingly. if theres 50 million avail for payroll, obviously one player isnt worth 50 million, but that is up to the market to decide how big a chunk each player is worth. kinda funny because that sounds like every payroll system at every company in the world.

if youre uncomfortable with the idea that the schools would have a payroll, why not just let athletes use their abilities and celebrity to make a living on the side? every other college student has the right to do that.

Ole Man Dan said:

Guys, I really have to disagree...
I'm reminded that It took me over 10 years after I graduated
to pay off my college loans.
I would have been grateful for a free ride.
I'm not a fan of paying players that are on scholarship to play ball.

Click to expand...

the players are worth more to the school on a monetary level than you. the school giving a player a scholarship makes the school, the coaches, and many other people much much more than their scholarship actually costs. you did not present that value to the school. it is adjacent to being a mid level manager and complaining that the CEO makes more money than you. your values are not equal.


if you were academically as gifted as the athletes are gifted athletically, you would be on a full scholarship anyway. so even in that comparison, youre saying that "i, an average to above average student, had to pay for school while this obviously special student got a scholarship and that isnt fair"

why arent you complaining about kids that get 36's on the ACT getting free rides? I wasnt even that smart and UA gave me a free ride and a check every semester. your argument is invalid.



to elaborate: us news says one athletic scholarship costs $10,400/year. x85=$884,000. UA football brought in $164M in 2016.

that means that for every dollar spent on a football players schooling, that athlete generated 185 dollars. I wasnt a business major, but I'm pretty sure that 18,400% return is pretty good.

cmmiller711 said:

every single human on planet earth is capable of this but college and high school athletes.

Click to expand...

Not so, lots of companies limit what their employees can do to earn money outside of work and even retain intellectual rights to research, discoveries, inventions, etc. made while working for said company. Actors & musicians enter into contracts all the time that restrict what they can and can’t do in terms of marketing themselves, as do many pro athletes.

The idea that this is something limited to college & HS athletes is not completely accurate.

USCBAMA said:

Not so, lots of companies limit what their employees can do to earn money outside of work and even retain intellectual rights to research, discoveries, inventions, etc. made while working for said company. Actors & musicians enter into contracts all the time that restrict what they can and can’t do in terms of marketing themselves, as do many pro athletes.

The idea that this is something limited to college & HS athletes is not completely accurate.

Click to expand...

ah but you sign an employment agreement with said company and you have a CHOICE whether to work there or work, in your field, somewhere else where you have more freedom away from work. i'm also certain that the market would dictate that this kind of restriction would also come with a very competitive paybump in order to attain and retain employees.

also your analogy works on the assumption that the athletes work for the school. (which they do) but they dont technically work for the school because the school doesnt pay them.

Ldlane said:

True College Football died decades ago.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. There used to be real, honest to goodness student-athletes. At least that is my understanding, that it was regular students who played the game. Of course that was when they only played three or four games a year. I often wonder if we went back to having regular students with academic scholarships instead of athletic scholarships what would happen? For one thing the game would go from an almost Pro like professionalism to a more amateurish game. There goes the stupendous one-handed grabs and the miracle plays that have become so prevalent. A lot of people would be saying BORING but I think I would like it.

I watched an old black-and-white game last year from a bowl game in 1961 or 1962 and it was like watching a high school game today. And the players were not 380 pound Charles Atlas's either, they looked like normal students.

I will save the trouble of someone dissecting this to pieces and just end with "Yes, I know we can't turn back the clock" and this will never occur. But I can think about the what-ifs and such.

Yeah right, go ahead and open up Pandora's Box! I'm sure the IRS and thousands of lawyers are itching to get involved in this! Has anyone bothered to figure how much is being spent on college athletes already? Free scholarship, Free room and board, free tutoring, free medical, free nutritional monitoring, free personal trainers, plus many more perks I can't even think of right now, thousands of $ each year for each athlete …. your average college student gets none of this! These people are already getting paid for playing whatever sport! Now I'm all for giving each athlete a monthly stipend for basic expenses included in their scholarship but paying the average college football or basketball player thousands of $ plus what they are already getting is pure madness!

Lovthablues said:

Yeah right, go ahead and open up Pandora's Box! I'm sure the IRS and thousands of lawyers are itching to get involved in this! Has anyone bothered to figure how much is being spent on college athletes already? Free scholarship, Free room and board, free tutoring, free medical, free nutritional monitoring, free personal trainers, plus many more perks I can't even think of right now, thousands of $ each year for each athlete …. your average college student gets none of this! These people are already getting paid for playing whatever sport! Now I'm all for giving each athlete a monthly stipend for basic expenses included in their scholarship but paying the average college football or basketball player thousands of $ plus what they are already getting is pure madness!

Click to expand...

a whole lot less than people/tv networks are spending on them, hence all the money for coaches salaries. coaches salaries would just correct.

The only real argument against paying players is “but things will change” or “that’s just the way it is”. It’s a logical fallacy to bar someone from making money they legally and rightfully are worth in the market place. Yes things will change. The way it is isnt the way it has to be. Kids are already getting paid. They shouldn’t have to live their lives in fear because someone is handing them money they’ve EARNED with honest hard work.

cmmiller711 said:

ah but you sign an employment agreement with said company and you have a CHOICE whether to work there or work, in your field, somewhere else where you have more freedom away from work. i'm also certain that the market would dictate that this kind of restriction would also come with a very competitive paybump in order to attain and retain employees.

also your analogy works on the assumption that the athletes work for the school. (which they do) but they dont technically work for the school because the school doesnt pay them.

Click to expand...

The athletes sign similar agreements, and they are compensated, just not in the form of direct pay, and they are not obligated to sign & play college ball though it is accurate that the options are limited.

But It’s not the colleges fault that the nfl doesn’t have a developmental league, and it would actually be anti-capitalistic to force them to become this. This tidbit from a Clay Travis article summarizes what so many fans seem to miss.

The NCAA doesn’t force high school athletes to play college athletics in football and basketball, the professional sports leagues do. It’s an important distinction that many fans and commentators miss.

Click to expand...

The solution lies with the nfl, not the ncaa. Paying players is a band-aid fix to a gushing wound. Allowing the few superstars on each team to cash in on their name recognition does little to help the 80 other players on the roster, and it opens up a huge can of worms in potential corruption and cheating.

cmmiller711 said:

The only real argument against paying players is “but things will change” or “that’s just the way it is”. It’s a logical fallacy to bar someone from making money they legally and rightfully are worth in the market place. Yes things will change. The way it is isnt the way it has to be. Kids are already getting paid. They shouldn’t have to live their lives in fear because someone is handing them money they’ve EARNED with honest hard work.

Click to expand...

We can fix this without paying them anything just by letting them make money on their own names. Wouldn't cost the schools a dime and wouldn't change their amateur status. Only the NCAA is stupid enough to believe that making money on your name makes one a professional athlete. We don't have to adopt their stupidity.

And I get that schools would be tempted to cheat by guaranteeing income in this way to athletes, but that wouldn't be necessary. Being a great athlete is going to present these opportunities on its own. Schools would be no more likely to cheat in this way than they are under the current system.

Sure, going to Alabama or USC would provide greater opportunity in this arena, but those schools have always had this kind of advantage. Nothing would change except the players making money on their name/likeness/endorsement opportunities.

USCBAMA said:

The athletes sign similar agreements, and they are compensated, just not in the form of direct pay, and they are not obligated to sign & play college ball though it is accurate that the options are limited.

But It’s not the colleges fault that the nfl doesn’t have a developmental league, and it would actually be anti-capitalistic to force them to become this. This tidbit from a Clay Travis article summarizes what so many fans seem to miss.



The solution lies with the nfl, not the ncaa. Paying players is a band-aid fix to a gushing wound. Allowing the few superstars on each team to cash in on their name recognition does little to help the 80 other players on the roster, and it opens up a huge can of worms in potential corruption and cheating.

Click to expand...

Saying they aren’t obligated to go to college to play pro ball is akin to saying someone isn’t obligated to get in a car or an airplane to get from Nebraska to New Zealand. Like, sure they could walk and then take a boat there, but is anyone going to do that? That’s why there’s a black market. Because the NCAA has created a black market by not allowing the market place to function.

The NCAA is complicit with the NFL in this. To say it’s entirely the NFLs fault for not having a minor league misses the fact that the NFL already has a minor league and that minor league is knowingly keeping money from the people who produce said money, forcing a black market.

B1GTide is right. If you don’t want the schools involved just let the kids sell their autographs and sell their likenesses for video games/advertising/etc.

There are a number of scholarships that pay a stipend in addition to full tuition and fees and supplies and housing and travel expenses and so on. Several of these exceed $20k/yr in stipends alone. Many colleges give other incentives to attract these students to their school. And nobody bats an eye.

That's what most of us are talking about. These guys work out all year round, travel, and so on and it is nearly impossible for them to hold a job. That is especially true during the fall but with year round training is quite difficult at any point.

What we have now is a corrupt system, but not always in the way you might think. Yes, players get paid under the table. Beyond unfair advantages this might create for the program it also causes legal problems potentially (IRS, etc;...). Stipends are usually tax free and if everyone does it there is no unfair advantage.

Beyond that, keeping a poor young man poor while making it nearly impossible for him to earn money (with the time/energy demands on elite athletes) for the enjoyment of others (entertainment) is bordering on criminal. That is corrupt in the worst way.

If Josh Jacobs were a Rhodes Scholar or a Bell or AT&T Scholarship recipient he could receive a sizable stipend in addition to all the other components of the scholarship. Those are merit based. Others are needs based. But because he is an athlete that's a no go. Nevermind that he brings as much or more value to the school than any of those students able to work their butts off to get the academic scholarships that pay a stipend. Nevermind that he could help his family now instead of leaving a year early for NFL money. Nevermind that he would have the choice more so than now to continue his schooling AND take care of family to a degree AND stay in school another year to advance academically AND play another year for his school should he choose to do so. As it is, there's not much of a choice for hi and many others from somewhat similar backgrounds.

Paying players a reasonable stipend alone might actually improve college football. It would definitely make it more humane. It would offer more players more choices.

Allowing players to earn money on their name and likeness would go further toward this goal. I do think there would need to be some minimal oversight by the schools so that these players don't end up doing commercials for payday loans or other seedy enterprises the schools would not want to be associated with.

Things used to be even worse in college athletics. A coach couldn't buy a meal for a hungry young man or pay for him to travel for his father's funeral and on and on and one - cruel and ridiculous. Some of those rules have loosened but a kid can't have a money producing youtube channel and play football. Stupid.

The Olympics changed. So can college football. It has to. It will. Just how much is up for debate.

http://www.finaid.org/scholarships/prestigious.phtml

Money is not infinite, if 3rd parties start paying athletes vs schools then there is an impact to the school, regardless if you see that as an issue or not.
Maybe the coke bottle will get off of sabans podium and tuna will start drinking coke.

Wakecrash said:

Money is not infinite, if 3rd parties start paying athletes vs schools then there is an impact to the school, regardless if you see that as an issue or not.
Maybe the coke bottle will get off of sabans podium and tuna will start drinking coke.

Click to expand...

Not exactly sure of what you mean or why it's a bad thing.

Ldlane said:

If they start paying players, then they need to start paying for internships and more benefits to Grad Teachers.

Click to expand...

And lets not make it worse by paying them.