DeuceBoogieNights
Active Member
Why would a player care how many undergrads we have if they are getting paid?
NCAA will permit athletes to be compensated
- Thread starter FBallFan123
- Start date
Why would a player care how many undergrads we have if they are getting paid?
WhatTheFrog
Active Member
No one ever said that the NCAA was responsible for taxation. All I'm saying is that, if these kids are getting paid, they should be subject to income taxes just like everyone else in the country that isn't a college athlete. Education goes out the window at this point. They should be subject to the federal income taxes as everyone else. Do you disagree?
WhatTheFrog
Active Member
No, my suggestion was to eliminate scholarships. They make their money and pay their tuition. That way, it creates a 32 team league (or so) and the NCAA falls apart. Maybe this would create a reboot of the entire system and a new system is implemented that levels the entire playing field.
FBallFan123
Active Member
The number of undergrads (and grads) could impact how much they get paid?
TCU is certainly not near the top in either category.
Zubaz
Member
I mean, I'm sure any NCAA team is free to decide to field a team comprised entirely of walk-on athletes seeking their own endorsements....not sure they'd be very competitive though.
FBallFan123
Active Member
My assumption is...a lot.
I imagine some programs will eventually become pretty good at monetizing a stadium of 90,000+.
Last edited:
Full scholarships are worth a hell of a lot more than coffee. What if those same workers couldn't make $10/hour if it wasn't for Starbucks?
The difference is that it will be an all out legal bidding war. The schools will be forced to institute a draft to keep things somewhat competitive. The logical next step is unlimited eligibility. Then you can institute a pro league at the college level with some schools being put together in a super league and other schools being relegated to minor league status. I know we kind of have that now with the various divisions but it would be really interesting to see schools working out deals with the 20 or so "major programs, which would form a "major league" to get players from those bigger programs and provide seasoning of those players before they are called up.to the bigs.
Moose Stuff
Active Member
Zubaz
Member
True, but a heck of a lot less than the revenue that they are generating. That's the debate, what share of college football revenue are the players entitled to? Any comparison or equating to a student working their way through college is therefore faulty on the face of it, as they are not comparable situations.
WhatTheFrog
Active Member
That's what I'm saying. The current NCAA can become NFL Jr. Get out of "college athletics" and do the money thing. They can have ND, OU, UT, Tosu, Alabama, Clemson, etc. The rest of the schools can devise their own organization to represent them.
I think the NCAA would fail because people don't really like or follow "minor leagues". More power to them.
REAL "scholar athletes" will then have a platform to display their skills. It's kinda what college athletics were established for to begin with. Crazy, I know. I happen to cheer for and buy season tickets to watch kids that have a pride in their school, not that they are trying to get paid to go to school AND obtain a higher education. I paid (actually, YOU paid) for my higher education and degree. I didn't GET PAID to get this education. Student athletes shouldn't, either.
H0RNEDFR0G
Full Member
We don't get 5 star recruits now. I'm not sure this changes anything. Schools are already paying players. The NCAA was created as an illusion of enforcement.
Watch the documentary on Laremy Tunsil called "Foul Play". Ole Miss and Miss State were offering dude duffel bags of cash. Texas A&M HAS to be doing the same. Look at the LSU donor who just got sentenced to 33 months in jail. KU has been playing basketball players for years.
Those of us that don't pay players, are already at a huge disadvantage. I don't see how this could make the disparity worse. I don't think we pay dudes bags of cash, but I could be just fooling myself. If anything, this could give TCU players an opportunity to make some extra money, without TCU doing anything illegal. Seems like a win for us.
This will actually benefit very few student athletes. There will not be ad campaigns with 15 NCAA QBs and 15 NCAA RBs. Who would get ads this year? Jalen Hurts or Joe Burrow? For WR maybe Tylan Wallace or CeeDee Lamb? For RB Chuba Hubbard?
We had 0 chance of getting any of these players, regardless of jersey sales etc. We offered Hubbard and Lamb, and I think we know how that worked out.
Tunstill doc:
The reason for that spite is most often jealousy. So they are jealous of people who are the victim of slave labor. Ok, got it.
1. Yes I wish I had that skillset and I am sure a lot do. If nothing else to get a free education to play a sport. And yes the schools do want their skillset so I agree they have earned it.
2. Really don't think that is a total bunk. Maybe by the time they are seniors or maybe juniors they have come to a realization that the NFL is not for them. However, a lot of these athletes coming in came from places where everyone told them since they scored their first middle school touchdown that they had NFL talent. Then it gets repeated over and over to them throughout high school and then they look up and Gary Patterson is in their living room giving them a scholarship and telling them they can be the next so and so. So yea I don't think most players know they aren't playing in the NFL. 14 of 25 seniors participated in TCU pro day last year.
3. Give me a free education and the opportunity to be an engineer over paid education and the opportunity to be an engineer. Like you said it can happen. Sure it's hard, but if that's what you really wanted to do anyway then maybe you should quit football and pay your way and focus on that. Alas - you get to actually play football and get that education for free. Is your solution that football players not spend 40+ hours a week in practice, meetings, and training? Because I do not see how paying players for their likeness fixes that issue of inequality of a non-athlete being able to capitalize on his free time to education versus an athlete.
4. Thousands of fans go to the games to see these kids play. Our student section as a ratio of undergrad population is as close to 1:1 as anywhere in the country. TCU students like football. They rushed the field Saturday mostly so they could get closer to the players and feel what its like to experience being on the field. I see envy and respect there. Again how does the pay for play fix the spite issue. Because players are getting paid they are all of the sudden going to be liked more by academes?
5. I must need to do more research. When I was in school we didn't have access to tutoring like my football buddies did. They basically had someone on call whenever they needed help. I however had to pay a campus tutor by the hour and it was on the tutors time. It may have changed now but it was always something I was envious of.
Lol, I can't believe I just typed all of that. At the end of the day you will argue with me regardless. I am also not against the idea of paying players. I had said all along that I personally believe there will be negative long term effects. I don't dream of infinite hypothetical scenario like I did with Taye Baber, but I use it as an example because it is not out of the realm of possibility. Maybe they can get this likeless thing correct and I hope it becomes an overall net benefit for ALL players and not just the Johnny Manziels of the world.
At the end of the day I am not dead against it, I simply fear what it can bring. You will have a hard time changing my mind on that and that getting a free ride to college is somehow "slave labor". The net benefit long term of compensating athletes for likeness I can be convinced one. Like someone said, you can convince me it can be better for the players, we can always strive to do better, but you can't convince me that they have it remotely bad.
Last edited:
And then you have the idea (or fact actually) that the revenue only exists because the players aren't getting paid, and that the players and their talents are worth basically nothing without their attachment to their school and the NCAA.
Zubaz
Member
There is more than enough revenue circulating college athletics for it to both remain incredibly successful AND include a more equitable share of revenue for the athletes that are generating the revenue.
Whether you call it "Player-Owner" or "Employee-Employer", there's a symbiotic relationship between the two. Yes, the school brand is responsible for generating some of the revenue as well, but to 100% ignore the athletes' contribution to the revenue being generated is just wrong.
FBallFan123
Active Member
TCU doesn't live on 5-star recruits, but they've gotten commitments from players who take visits to places like LSU, A&M, Texas, etc.
I think the worry is the bigger schools become even harder to beat in recruiting battles once they can talk about legit money in their recruiting pitches.
I mean, just imagine how recruiting visits will look like once big schools, and athletes at those big schools, can talk about the kind of money-making opportunities there are there.
Seems like a game changer.
There is more than enough revenue circulating college athletics for it to both remain incredibly successful AND include a more equitable share of revenue for the athletes that are generating the revenue.
Whether you call it "Player-Owner" or "Employee-Employer", there's a symbiotic relationship between the two. Yes, the school brand is responsible for generating some of the revenue as well, but to 100% ignore the athletes' contribution to the revenue being generated is just wrong.
That's just the thing though, they aren't "100% ignoring it". 100% ignoring it would be offering no scholarships or benefits to any athlete. Players get free education at some ridiculously expensive schools, free housing, free food that's better then the other students pay for, free clothes, free tutors, free just about everything, and a stipend on top of that. Where is this idea that a scholarship and all that comes with it is somehow worthless?
The line is miles and miles long of other athletes waiting to step in and take the place of all of these disenfranchised kids. Why is that if it is so damn unfair?
Dreaming once again. You are hopeless.
No, it is not jealousy. Spite, more accurately. They feel like athletes (a) shouldn't have been allowed in school to begin with (i.e., received preferential treatment in the acceptance process, which certainly happens) and (b) they don't like the athlete culture, which is a reality; meathead culture exists and professors don't like it.
